Our Blog

In this appeal from two felony convictions of promoting prison contraband, defendant knowingly possessed a cellphone in the jail or prison facility, but claimed he did not know it was contraband. After harmonizing five statutes, the Arizona Supreme Court held the State must only prove the defendant “knowingly” possessed a cellphone. The prosecution need…

Arizona Supreme Court affirmed felony domestic violence conviction. Trial court did not abuse its discretion in allowing “cold” expert witness testimony on why domestic violence victims often stay in abusive relationships. Expert testimony was not impermissible offender profiling. Arizona v. Mark Haskie, Jr. Felony Domestic Violence in Arizona Law The defendant was convicted of…

In Arson case, evidence of a previous fire was admitted to show a common plan or scheme in the burning of an occupied structure which was defendant’s house. Evidence from an anonymous informant was also admitted. Defendant was convicted of arson, a class 2 dangerous felony, and attempted fraudulent schemes and artifices, a class…

ASU student with medical marijuana card convicted of drug possession on campus despite having amount allowed by Arizona Medical Marijuana Act (AMMA). Reversed on appeal. AMMA amendment was unconstitutional to extent it violated the Voter Protection Act. Arizona v. Andre Lee Juwaun Maestas Arizona Legislation Prohibited Medical Marijuana on Public College and University Campuses…

Prior convictions are an element of the crime of felony shoplifting in Arizona law; shoplifting priors are not sentencing enhancements therefore bifurcating the trial was not required. Arizona v. Lara Bifurcated Trials and Prejudicial Impact of Prior Convictions on Juries Lara was convicted of felony shoplifting after stealing merchandise from a Walmart store. Because…

In this Arizona criminal case, defendant was convicted of aggravated DUI. He appealed his conviction, arguing the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress breathalyzer test results because he was denied the right to counsel; and that the trial court improperly instructed the jury. His conviction was affirmed by the Arizona Court…

Defendants were medical marijuana cardholders convicted of drug DUI for operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of marijuana or its metabolite. Were defendants immune from drug DUI prosecution under the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act? Conviction affirmed on appeal. To learn more, read our discussion about drug DUI in Arizona law and how…

In this marijuana possession case, the statement made by defendant in order to participate in Maricopa County’s Treatment Assessment Screening Center (TASC) deferred prosecution program was admission of guilt used against him at trial; and was not barred by Ariz. Rule of Evidence 410(a)(4) which applies to plea negotiations. State of Arizona and Dustin…

Generally stalking can be defined as actions or conduct directed at a specific person that would cause a reasonable individual to experience varying degrees of fear. In a recently conducted study by The U.S. Department of Justice, stalking victims were classified if they responded to any of the following behaviors: Receiving multiple unsolicited texts…

In a DUI case, Arizona’s highest court clarified application of the medical blood draw exception to the warrant requirement where an injured DUI suspect resisted medical treatment at the scene of the vehicular accident, but was restrained and sedated with blood drawn at the hospital at which time police requested a portion of the…