Brown & Little, P.L.C. » Arizona Cases
Getting in Their Heads
Eric Turkewitz at the New York Personal Injury Law Blog published a guest post about whether jurors should be allowed to ask questions at trial. Apparently that doesn’t happen in New York. It sure does here in Arizona, as we’ve heard about ad nauseam because of the Jodi Arias trial. The guest-poster, Peter DeFilippis, concluded that increased juror participation would aid their judicial system in achieving the goal of providing justice for all. I can’t say that I disagree. I am a pretty big fan of jury questions because they’re wonderful little spoilers that help you know where to focus. I can also see how they help to connect jurors to what’s happening. The insight into the jurors’ thoughts that a system like ours … Read entire article »
Filed under: Arizona Cases, Juries, Trial
A Waste
From this article at the Arizona Republic: I do wish I could die doing something meaningful. You know, this seems such a waste. Those were a man’s last words. He died soon after without uttering any “official” last words. He liked porterhouse steak, french fries, okra, cauliflower, salad, fruit and ice cream. He liked those things so much they were the last things he ate before we murdered him. The good folks at the prison complex where we killed him, our crackerjack “execution team,” didn’t have an easy job. The doomed man was nice enough, joking with them as they prepared to end his life, but they had a real tough time setting the two intravenous lines intended to deliver fatal toxins. They had to cut into the … Read entire article »
Filed under: Arizona Cases, Death Penalty
Bad Reporting
Someone forwarded me this story recently. They thought I would be interested in the topic because I’m involved in related litigation. I was interested. Unfortunately, what I got from it wasn’t just information about what happened in the case, but also concerns about the abysmal quality of the reporting. “After 6-hour trial, Snowbowl protester still guilty,” the title reads. It’s amazing the words “still guilty” made it through editing. I assume that the author intended to somehow emphasize that, despite what she perceives to be a lengthy trial, the defendant did not prevail. “Snowbowl protester found guilty after 6-hour trial” probably would’ve conveyed that just fine. It also would’ve avoided the frustrating misconceptions that abound from the title she actually chose. Her title suggests the poor guy … Read entire article »
Filed under: Arizona Cases, News
Poor Charlie Brown
I’ve mentioned Anders briefs before. It’s the defense-lawyer equivalent of licking your master’s hand in submission. A creative lawyer can always find some issue somewhere, and filing a brief more or less saying your client should’ve been found guilty based on the record is just embarrassing. If you aren’t sold on not filing Anders briefs solely because they’re humiliating to any competent lawyer, Arizona’s court of appeals recently provided another reason. In an opinion last week, the court disagreed with an appellate public defender’s assessment that only frivolous issues existed on appeal. The lawyer apparently reviewed the record enough to set forth a sufficient background to reveal potential issues, but he didn’t see at least one issue that the court saw. I can’t imagine much worse for a … Read entire article »
Filed under: Arizona Cases, Courts
The Greater Harm
Early last month, the United States District Court for the District of Arizona issued an opinion about whether driving slowly in the fast lane constituted reasonable suspicion for a traffic stop. FourthAmendment.com wrote about the opinion a few days ago in a post entitled “D.Ariz.: Driving less than the speed limit in the left lane was RS for stop.” Curious, I looked up the case and read the facts. An officer was patrolling the three lanes of westbound traffic on I-10 in Tucson when he saw a pickup truck in the far-left lane going under the 65 mile-per-hour speed limit. The officer noticed other cars were slowing behind the black pickup and passing it in the center lane. When the speed limit increased to 75 miles per … Read entire article »
Filed under: Arizona Cases, immigration, Search and Seizure
Making Bad Law
I recently had an interesting talk with a prosecutor. I litigated a case against him a little while back, and I thought it had decent facts for a motion to suppress. The officer’s report clearly stated that he had completed the traffic stop, issued a warning, and told the occupants they were free to go before re-initiating contact and asking them, “hey, do you mind if I take a look in the car?” There’s an Arizona court of appeals case from last year called State v. Sweeney. In it, the court held that, after a traffic stop has concluded, an officer must have reasonable cause to initiate a second detention of a suspect. Based on the totality of the circumstances, the officer in my case didn’t have … Read entire article »
Filed under: Arizona Cases, Prosecutors, Search and Seizure
Self-Defense, Depublication, and Uncertainty
In Arizona, felons who haven’t had their rights restored can’t possess firearms. It’s a class 4 felony, and because alleged offenders are obviously likely to have at least one historical prior felony conviction, defendants charged with misconduct involving weapons under the prohibited possessor subsection usually face a pretty significant mandatory prison term. What if they possess the firearm in self-defense though? The self-defense statute justifies “threatening or using physical force against another.” It doesn’t necessarily justify possessing a firearm if you’re a prohibited possessor. Another statute justifies the defensive display of a firearm, again not specifically allowing a prohibited possessor to possess a firearm, and the statute governing the use of force in defense of a residential structure or occupied vehicle and the statute governing the use … Read entire article »
Filed under: Arizona Cases, Arizona Statutes, Procedural Rules
Just Another Double-Standard
Clients who are interested in a plea usually want a probation plea. It should come as no surprise that most criminal defendants would love to avoid prison, and in Arizona, the potential range of prison for the charge underlying the conviction gets suspended while the defendant completes probation. Violate and you face the original prison sentencing range, but in the end, whether you ever end up facing any prison sentence at all is almost entirely in your hands. Probation isn’t all fun and games though. An Arizona criminal defendant can get up to a year in the county jail as part of probation. That’s especially tough considering that many county jails are terrible. Clients often tell me they’d rather spend a long time in state prison … Read entire article »
Filed under: Arizona Cases, Courts, Probation
That's Him!
I seem to be taking on a lot more cases with major identification issues as of late. As a result, I’ve been preparing quite a few Dessureault motions. In Arizona, a Dessureault motion is what lawyers call a motion challenging an unduly suggestive pretrial identification procedure. Because an unduly suggestive photo or in-person lineup can mean that a witness misidentifies the defendant not merely at the time of the lineup but also at trial, the case law requires that the trial court hold a hearing to determine whether the pretrial identification process was unduly suggestive. At that hearing, the state bears the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that the process was not unduly suggestive. It might seem like the law is relatively pro-defendant in … Read entire article »
Filed under: Arizona Cases
Legal Strategery in Marikafka County
Adam Stoddard is probably still in jail. If you need some background, catch up here, here, and here. Maricopa County has seen bomb threats and pepper spray incidents that may be related to his detention, as well as a law enforcement rally and vigil showing support for him. Meanwhile, deputy county attorney Tom Liddy, who still seems to be counsel for Stoddard, makes what could at best be called weak offering in his defense. Will disclosing the contents of the documents Stoddard illegally viewed and seized really help get him out any sooner? It seems Liddy, who claims to represent Stoddard and not the sheriff, is more concerned about making a joke out of the fourth, fifth, sixth, and fourteenth amendments than he is about … Read entire article »
Filed under: Arizona Cases, Procedural Rules
Recent Comments