Failing to Comply
The recent opinion from Division One of the Arizona Court of Appeals in State v. Burke deals with the issue of whether A.R.S. § 28-622(A), a law involving failure to comply with a police officer, is unconstitutionally vague. The law provides as follows: A person shall not wilfully fail or refuse to comply with any lawful order or direction of a police officer invested by law with authority to direct, control or regulate traffic. The facts of the actual case, as the court explains them, seem pretty simple: This case arises out of a routine traffic stop. After Burke allegedly failed to stop at a stop sign, a police officer pulled Burke over, asked him for his license and registration, and directed him not to move his vehicle. Burke disobeyed the instructions, drove … Read entire article »
Filed under: Arizona Cases, Police
Nothing Better To Do
My biggest takeaway from State v. Foncette is that there must be no crime in Tempe. Officers stopped Foncette, apparently smelled marijuana, and brought a drug dog to the scene. The dog alerted, but they found nothing. They proceeded to follow him to a hotel and walked with the dog down the hallway outside of the room where he was staying. The dog alerted outside of his room, and officers knocked. When he opened the door, officers apparently smelled marijuana again. Foncette left the room when officers asked, but his companion did not. Police then detained both of them, and they subsequently got a warrant for a nighttime search of the hotel room. They found a lot of marijuana. Obviously, there were no burglaries in Tempe that night. I am sure … Read entire article »
Filed under: Arizona Cases, Drugs, Medical Marijuana
When It Isn’t A Cop
Police officer Darren Wilson wasn’t indicted for shooting Michael Brown. You shouldn’t be surprised, as Rick Horowitz concludes. Scott Greenfield explains the big lie too many people still believe, the idea that the grand jury in the case isn’t just an indictment machine built into a Potemkin Village of due process for just one case so the masses can go on about their lives. Gideon explores the racial aspect, and Jeff Gamso addresses the silliness of one grand jury dog and pony show promoter. Me? I’m just envious. Here in Arizona, the accused has a due process right to a fair and impartial presentation of the evidence before a grand jury. When the state fails to do that, defense counsel can file a motion to remand arguing the state … Read entire article »
Filed under: Arizona Cases, Government Rants, Juries, Police, Prosecutors
How It Really Works
Rule 9.1 of the Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure seems pretty simple. It covers a defendant’s waiver of the right to be present in court and provides as follows: [A] defendant may waive the right to be present at any proceeding by voluntarily absenting himself or herself from it. The court may infer that an absence is voluntary if the defendant had personal notice of the time of the proceeding, the right to be present at it, and a warning that the proceeding would go forward in his or her absence should he or she fail to appear. Reading it like a reasonable person capable of understanding the English language and with even the slightest faculty when it comes to basic logic, the rule pretty obviously allows a court to infer … Read entire article »
Filed under: Arizona Cases
Lenity?
Imagine that you are appearing in front of an Arizona Superior Court judge for your sentencing and are scared to death. Your trial had all sorts of obvious errors, but you were convicted of a felony DUI charge anyway. You are being sent to prison, and you want to appeal. The judge tells you that your notice of appeal must be filed “within 20 days after the entry of judgment and sentence.” If you are like the hundreds or maybe even thousands of people I have represented at sentencing hearings in cases of all sorts, you would probably just be doing everything you could to avoid fainting. Your life is ruined. You probably failed to hear a single thing the judge said. Your reasonable lawyer might … Read entire article »
Filed under: Arizona Cases
Bad Facts + Time = Bad Law
There is an old saying about bad facts making bad law. It is probably true, but luckily, that does not have to be the case. Look no further than the recent Court of Appeals of Arizona case of State v. Lucas and its predecessor for proof. They also show that nearly-identical bad facts will eventually, even before the same court, create bad law sooner or later. The facts of both cases were simple. Victims have a right to refuse interviews in Arizona, and courts can designate a victim’s representative by law when the victim is a minor. In State v. Lucas, the grandmother was the victim’s representative, and the victim reached the age of majority. The defense wanted to interview her. The law provides the … Read entire article »
Filed under: Arizona Cases, Victim's Rights
Crappy Outcome For Doody
I was quite proud of myself for writing a whole post about Jonathan Doody’s case a couple of months ago without making a single poop joke. Trying to write two was tempting fate, so please forgive the title. Anyway, the combined tireless efforts of the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office and its lying admitted-serial-killer pal and star-witness Alessandro Garcia finally paid off when they were able to convict Doody, who may be innocent, after a Ninth Circuit reversal, a mistrial, and five days of jury deliberations well over two decades later. They must be proud. We can now all rest assured that this punk kid won’t ever be at large: He may look like a sad, middle-aged man who has spent every moment of his adult life in prison because … Read entire article »
Filed under: Arizona Cases
Why People Make Jokes About Arizona
Alessandro Garcia is a killer. There’s no doubt about it. By his own ongoing admission, Garcia was part of the infamous Buddhist Temple Massacre that occurred on August 10, 1991. I have no idea what actually happened or who else was involved, but it’s undisputed that Garcia and one or more others killed six Buddhist monks, two young initiates, and an elderly nun. Apparently, they shot all of the victims in the back of the head at close range more than once. The innocent victims were made to kneel on the floor of the temple before being shot dead, one by one. Some had died while praying. All but the first likely witnessed the others being shot. It was part of a robbery, and … Read entire article »
Filed under: Arizona Cases
He Was Screwed No Matter What
In a recent Supreme Court of Arizona case, State v. Duran, the defendant tried to plead guilty but the trial court rejected his plea. The trial court then royally messed up by saying the prosecutor could use statements Duran made in connection with his change of plea if he testified inconsistently with them at trial. It’s important here to keep in mind the fact the trial court was wrong. Duran’s statements never, ever should have been used against him. The trial court made a mistake, and as a result, the defendant was confronted with the dilemma of testifying and bearing the disastrous brunt of the court’s mistake or not testifying and probably making the best of a really bad situation. A conviction would pretty much be guaranteed … Read entire article »
Filed under: Arizona Cases, Courts
Recent Comments