Source: http://www.azattorneymag-digital.com/azattorneymag/201104/?pg=70
Timestamp: 2018-08-18 10:55:24
Document Index: 796827877

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 13', '§ 22', '§ 22', '§ 12', '§ 13', '§ 13', '§ 28']

indictment, in a case in which the jury instruction given at trial implicitly amended the indictment by using more expansive language of the statute. State v. Rivera, 2 CA-CR 2010-0176, 1/27/11.
A trial court commits fundamental error if prior to determining the guilt or innocence of a defendant based on a submitted record, the court fails to fully advise the defendant of certain rights in accordance with the Arizona Supreme Court’s decision in State v. Avila. Unlike cases in which a defendant may stipulate to particular elements of a crime and no colloquy is required, in Avila, our Supreme Court addressed the rights of submitting defendants and formulated a list of six advisements or warnings that “must be afforded” a submitting defendant prior to such a summary proceeding. State v. Bunting, 1 CA-CR 09-0738 & 1 CA-CR 09-0740 (Consolidated), 1/25/11.
A trial court errs in denying a
defense motion to dismiss a dan-
gerous-nature allegation in a neg-
ligent homicide case in which the
victim died of internal injuries
caused by the defendant’s use of
his soft tennis-shoe-shod foot in
kicking the victim. A.R.S. § 13-
701(D)( 2) provides that the “[u]se,
threatened use or possession of a …
dangerous instrument is “anything
that under the circumstances in
which it is used, attempted to be
used, or threatened to be used, is
readily capable of causing death or
serious physical injury.” In State v.
Gordan the Arizona Supreme Court
held that “fists” (or other body parts
for that matter) cannot generally be
dangerous instruments. State v.
King, 2 CA-CR 2009-0311,
1/14/11.
In a civil forfeiture case related
to a parallel criminal proceeding,
the civil proceeding court errs in
denying a State’s request for a
protective order under the
Arizona Victims’ Bill of Rights to
prohibit the defendant(s) from
deposing the named victim(s) in
the civil case where the named vic-
tim(s) in the criminal case had
previously asserted their right not
to be interviewed or deposed in
the criminal case. State v. Franklin,
Sr./Franklin, Jr., 2 CA-SA 2010-
0068, 1/13/11.
The Arizona Court of Appeals does not have jurisdiction over an appeal from a trial de novo in superior court (held pursuant to A.R.S. § 22-374 after an appeal from a conviction in justice court where the record was not available) in cases where an appellant raises no issues enumerated in § 22-375(A). State v. Eby, 2 CA-CR 2010-0141, 1/12/11.
A trial court does not err in denying a defense motion to preclude expert testimony by finding that A.R.S. § 12-2203 ( pertaining to the admission of expert testimony) not only conflicts with Rule 702, ARIZ.R.EVID., yet violates the separation of powers doctrine. Lear v. State of Arizona, 2 CA-SA 2010-0074, 1/12/11.
A.R.S. § 13-116 does not pro-
hibit consecutive sentence for the
separately charged offenses of
(methamphetamine) for sale and
(methamphetamine) because the
two offenses are distinct, may be
committed separately, and impose
separate risks. A.R.S. § 13-116
prohibits consecutive sentences
for offenses arising out of a single
act or omission. State v. Martinez,
CR09-0150, 1/11/11.
Revised Arizona Jury Instruction (RAJI) (Criminal) 28.1383(A)( 1)- 1 does not correctly state the law in A.R.S. § 28- 1381 (DUI—Impaired to the Slightest Degree) because it improperly adds an element to an impairment related DUI. The Court of Appeals stated in its conclusion that this opinion has a limited effect, as courts and parties have been able to explain the law correctly to juries. State of Arizona v. Oliveri/Nelson, 2 CA-SA 2010- 0056 & 2 CA-SA 2010-0063, 1/7/11.
the process and art
'HIHQGLQJ <RXU /LEHUW\ DQG <RXU /LFHQVH
Jim Belanger, Scott Bennett
*BestLawyers; Criminal Defense and
(Jim Belanger, 2007; present)
ChambersUSA;
(Jim Belanger, 2004; present; Top-Tier 2010)
Visit our website for more information about our practice areas
Health Care Litigation Employment Corporate & Real Estate Criminal Defense & Government Investigations State Bar Proceedings
r a B et
s g din e e c ro P
2800 North Central Ave., Suite 1200 Phoenix, AZ 85004
602-224-0999