Court of Appeals, Division 1

ALL LINKS ON THIS PAGE ARE PDF FILES AND WILL REQUIRE ADOBE ACROBAT READER    


May 3, 2012 . . . . . . . . . SA 12-0067 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .BMO Harris Bank v. Hon. Bluff/Myers

Can a court find a party in contempt of a court order for expressing an intention to
violate that order in the future?

December 29, 2011. . . . .SA 11-0227. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . BNSF v. Hon. Buttrick/Crain

When an injured railway worker is a party both to a state court personal injury action and
an employer's disciplinary proceeding conducted under a collective bargaining agreement,
does the superior court have authority to enter a protective order that prevents direct
communications between the employer and employee concerning the employee's medical
condition as required by the CBA?


December 27, 2011. . . . .SA 11-0195. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . State v. Duncan/Fries

Whether the victim's alleged statements regarding his prior sexual conduct can be used
by the defendant to demonstrate the defendant's belief that the victim was not a minor?

December 6, 2011 . . . . . SA 11-0204 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Fogliano v. Hon. Brain/AHCCCS

Proposition 204, a voter-enacted initiative, expands the number of Arizonans who are eligible
to receive Medicaid benefits.  Can the courts determine whether the Legislature has provided
supplemental funding "by any other available sources" as required by Proposition 204?


November 10, 2011. . . . . SA 11-0129. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Brewer v. Hon. Rees/State

1. Was defendant admitted to bail while prosecution was suspended on his previous
charge?

2. Was defendant deprived of his due process rights because the trial court held him
non-bondable without first conducting a hearing?

November 8, 2011. . . . . . SA 11-0146. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ADES v. Hon. Lee/Kimberly J.

Did the juvenile court err when it ordered Child's release from temporary custody without
hearing evidence concerning Child's health and safety, after it concluded ADES had
failed to timely perform a custody review pursuant to Arizona Revised Statutes
section 8-822.3?

November 1, 2011. . . . . . SA 11-0170. . . . . . .  . . . . . . ..Phoenix Childrens Hospital
                                                                                    v. Hon. Grant/Riddle

Does Duquette v. Superior Court (App. 1989) bar communications outside of formal
discovery between a hospital and the hospital’s own physician employees who provided
treatment to the plaintiff?

October 27, 2011. . . . . . .SA 11-0016/0020/0025/0031 . ..Mario W. v. Hon. Kaipio/State

May Arizona Revised Statutes section 8-238 be constitutionally applied to the seven
juvenile petitioners to require the submission by the juveniles of a DNA sample as a
condition of their release?

August 2, 2011 . . . . . . . .SA 11-0146 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ADES v. Hon. Lee/Kimberly

Did the juvenile court err when it ordered Child's release from temporary custody without
hearing evidence concerning Child's health and safety, after it concluded ADES had
failed to timely perform a custody review pursuant to Arizona Revised Statutes
section 8-822.3?


July 28, 2011 . . . . . . . . . SA 11-0026/11-0030/11-0036 . .Lund v. Hon. Donahoe/Miller

1.  Is a subpoena that calls for a testifying expert to produce copies of reports generated
for the past five years per se improper?

2.  Are communications concerning discovery strategy among counsel who are parties
to a common interest agreement protected by privilege?

3.  May a court summarily order the confinement of an attorney who asserts attorney-client
privilege without first granting the opportunity for appellate review of the merits of the
privilege question?

4.  Must a finding of contempt or the imposition of discovery sanctions be based upon
articulable reasons?

July 26, 2011 . . . . . . . . .SA 11-0145 . . . . . . . . . . . Costa v. Hon. Ainley, Hon. Mackey/State

1.  Did Judge Ainley abuse her discretion by setting bail in the amount of $75,000,000
in cash?

2.  Did Judge Mackey err by denying the motion for change of judge for cause?

July 21, 2011. . . . . . . . . SA 11-0127. . . . . . . . . . . .State v. Hon. Whitten/Martinez

Did the superior court err by ordering the State to compensate the deceased victim's
treating physicians as expert witnesses if they are called to testify at the murder trial?

July 21, 2011. . . . . . . . ..SA 10-0255. . . . . . . . . . . . Raimey v. Hon. Ditsworth/Dreamland

1.  Based on this court's holding that certain amended restrictive covenants are invalid
and unenforceable, did the trial court err when it impliedly found that the holding applies
only to homeowners who were parties to the litigation?

2.  Did the trial court err in denying the homeowners' request for restitution based on the
judgments they paid prior to this court's decision holding that the amended restrictive
covenants are invalid and enforceable?

3.  Were the homeowners entitled to be heard on their request for attorneys' fees incurred
in the superior court?

May 26, 2011 . . . . . . . . SA 11-0101/SA 11-0105 . Winterbottom/Perkins v. Ronan

Does the Crime Victims Bill of Rights protect a crime victim against a deposition conducted
by a criminal defendant’s former attorney in a legal malpractice case between the defendant
and his former attorney?

May 5, 2011 . . . . . . . . . SA 11-0084 . . . . . . . . . . Haag v. Hon. Steinle/State

Does Arizona Revised Statutes section 13-3967(E)(1) require that a
non-resident criminal defendant remain in Maricopa County, where
electronic monitoring is available, rather than be released to his home county,
where monitoring is unavailable.

March 3, 2011 . . . . . . . SA 10-0266 . . . . . . . . . . Cosper v. Hon. Rea/Mora

When a new expert witness is disclosed after the filing of an appeal from compulsory
arbitration but before the expiration of the 80-day discovery period, must a party
show good cause to call the witness at trial?

March 1, 2011 . . . . . . . SA 11-0007 . . . . . . . . . . State v. Hon. Reeves/Aguirre

1.  Does a person injured in a vehicle accident qualify as a victim under the Victims' Bill
of Rights when the defendant is charged solely with leaving the scene of a fatal accident?

2.  May the parents of a minor child killed in a vehicle accident, in which the defendant
is charged solely with leaving the scene of a fatal accident, invoke the rights and 
protections of the Victims' Bill of Rights?

February 8, 2011 . . . . . SA 10-0264 . . . . . . . . . . Black v. Hon. Coker/State/Rozema

Whether the prosecutor has a duty to convey to the grand jury a defendant's unequivocal
offer to testify when the defendant has not provided any detail of the proposed testimony,
and there is no other indication of clearly exculpatory evidence?

February 8, 2011 . . . . . SA 10-0267 . . . . . . . . . Bashir v. Pineda/State

Whether the prosecutor has a duty to inform the grand jury of the subject and outline
of a defendant's proposed testimony when she has communicated them to the prosecutor
with her offer to testify?

February 1, 2011 . . . . . SA 10-0223 . . . . . . . . . Sigmund v. Hon. Rea/ASCENZ

Can Arizona courts exercise personal jurisdiction over residents of Missouri who 
have no contacts with Arizona apart from the unilateral business dealings of their
spouses?

October 28, 2010 . . . . .SA 09-0212 . . . . . . . . . .Romley v. Hon. Daughton/Board

1.  Whether the County Board of Supervisors, believing the County Attorney has
conflicts of interests in representing the Board, may on its own initiative lawfully employ
outside counsel to advise it about such conflicts?

2.  Whether and under what conditions may the Board hire counsel other than the
County Attorney to represent the County in civil legal matters.

October 19, 2010 . . . . .SA 10-0068 . . . . . . . . . .Longoria v. Hon. Slayton/State

Did the trial court err in defining "deadline" to mean that Rule 15.8 does not
apply to a plea offer that is not accompanied by an expressly stated deadline?

September 21, 2010 . . . SA 10-0131 . . . . . . . . . Nielson v. Hon. Hicks/St. Johns

When real property is not the basis of the relief sought in plaintiff's complaint, but is
rather peripheral to the action, did the trial court err in transferring venue under
the mandatory real property exception of the venue statute, Arizona Revised Statutes
section 12-401(12)?

August 24, 2010 . . . . . . SA 10-0098 . . . . . . . . . Jacobsen v. Hon. Lindberg/State

Does Arizona Revised Statutes section 13-4066 adequately protect a probationer's
right against self-incrimination when the probationer is required to submit to a polygraph
examination as a condition of probation?

August 12, 2010 . . . . . . SA 10-0126 . . . . . . . . . Morehart/Duffy v. Hon. Barton/State

Did the trial court err in granting, over an objection from the victims, the defendant's
request for an ex parte hearing for the purpose of considering mitigation discovery?

July 6, 2010 . . . . . . . . . .SA 10-0099 . . . . . . . . . Martin-Costa v. Hon. Kiger/State

1.  Does the Victims' Bill of Rights, the Crime Victims' Implementation Act or the
Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure grant a crime victim standing to move to challenge
a judge for cause or disqualify an attorney representing a party?

2.  Does a nonparty have a right to "intervene" in a criminal case to prevent confidential
information from being revealed by seeking disqualification of the law firm that previously
represented her in divorce proceedings and now represents her husband in a criminal
case?

July 1, 2010 . . . . . . . . . .SA 09-0252 . . . . . . . . . State Compensation Fund v. Hon. Fink/
Lopez/Verduzco

Is a workers' compensation carrier entitled to intervene in 2009 in an injured worker's
negligence action against a manufacturer on the basis of the sentence added in 2007 to 
Arizona Revised Statutes section 23-1023(C), when the accident occurred in 2004 and 
the negligence action was initiated in 2006?

June 29, 2010 . . . . . . . . SA 10-0068 . . . . . . . . . Rivera-Longoria v. Hon. Slayton/State

Did the trial court err in defining "deadline" to mean that Rule 15.8 does not apply to
a plea offer that is not accompanied by an expressly stated deadline?

June 22, 2010 . . . . . . . . SA 10-0038 . . . . . . . . . Perry v. Hon. Ronan/Bennett

1.  Did the trial court err in finding that no settlement agreement existed?

2.  Did the settlement agreement comply with Arizona Rule of Civil Procedure 80(d)?

May 27, 2010 . . . . . . . . SA 09-0098 . . . . . . . . .State v. Hon. Weiss/Graham

Did the magistrate and superior court err in dismissing the DUI charges against 
defendant for violation of his Sixth Amendment right to counsel?

April 29, 2010 . . . . . . . . SA 09-0067 . . . . . . . . .State v. Hon. Kiger/Roseberry

1.  Does Arizona Revised Statutes section 31-255 require the sheriff of a county where
a court proceeding is pending to execute all transport orders regarding prison inmates
whenever the reason for the transport arises out of the court proceeding?

2.  Does the superior court possess inherent authority to compel the agency that has 
custody of an inmate to transport the inmate for court-related proceedings that do not 
require the inmate to be brought before the court?

3.  Did the superior court's transport order interfere with the executive authority of
the Arizona Department of Corrections?

April 6, 2010. . . . . . . . .  SA 09-0300. . . . . . . . ..Stoddard v. Donahoe/Lozano

1.  Did the trial judge err when he found the detention officer in indirect civil contempt of 
court, and not criminal contempt, for taking documents from the file of the defense lawyer
during a sentencing hearing?

2.  Did the trial judge err when he ordered the detention officer to call a press conference and
apologize to the defense lawyer for any damage to her reputation as a result of his acts?

December 22, 2009 . . . . SA 09-0260 . . . . . . . . .Trombi v. Hon. Donahoe/Alvarez-Miranda

1.  Does a presiding judge have authority to consolidate multiple cases for the limited purpose
of hearing contempt proceedings involving a common issue?

2.  Does the superior court have the power to order the timely transport of inmates to 
court proceedings by the Sheriff?

3.  May the court impose civil contempt sanctions requiring payment of compensation to
participants in criminal cases that cannot be avoided by future compliance with court orders?

December 1, 2009 . . . . . SA 09-0152 . . . . . . . . .Schoeneweis v. Hon. Hamner/Fischione

1.  Are Medical Examiner's Records "public records?"

2.  Are autopsy reports subject to public release when a death results from 
potential criminal conduct?

3.  Are death certificates public records?

4.  Are death certificates subject to public release?

October 27, 2009 . . . . . .SA 09-0130 . . . . . . . . .Sorokin v. Hon. Arnold/I.T.

Is a mental health screening agency filing a petition for evaluation of a person 
alleged to be a danger to others required by Arizona Revised Statutes section
36-521(G) to provide the court with any recommendation made by the county
attorney pursuant to that statute or only one recommending no further proceedings?

October 8, 2009 . . . . . . .SA 09-0145 . . . . . . . . .American Family v. Hon. Grant/Allo

Did the trial court abuse its discretion in enforcing a broad subpoena duces tecum to 
an expert witness that directed him to produce extensive documentation about his 
service as an expert and his financial records for a period of nine years?

September 10, 2009 . . . .SA 09-0146 . . . . . . . . .Francis v. Hon. Sanders/MCAO

Must the state respond accurately to a grand juror's question concerning the law
governing an affirmative defense?

September 10, 2009 . . . .SA 09-0153 . . . . . . . . .Cicoria v. Hon. Cole/State

Did the courts below err in determining that petitioner was required to serve 180
days in jail based on a BAC exceeding .20 within two hours of driving, even
though the sentencing enhancement statute did not specifically incorporate the
"within two hours of driving" language from other parts of the statute?

September 3, 2009 . . . . .SA 09-0144 . . . . . . . . .State v. Hon. Duncan/Escalante
Orozco

Whether the superior court can limit the evaluative method an expert may use during
the Arizona Revised Statutes section 13-753 prescreen evaluation?

September 1, 2009 . . . . .SA 09-0042 . . . . . . . . .Carrillo v. Hon. Houser/Phoenix
City Prosecutor's Office

Is a finding that a defendant failed to refuse to a blood draw in a DUI case a
sufficient basis for the denial of a motion to suppress on the ground that defendant
consented to the search?

August 25, 2009 . . . . . . .SA 09-0151 . . . . . . . . .Campbell v. Hon. Barton/Thomas

May a criminal defendant who files a notice of change of judge as a matter of
right under Rule 10.2 before the State elects to seek the death penalty file a 
second notice of change of judge after the State announces its intention to seek
the death penalty?

July 21, 2009 . . . . . . . . . SA 09-0082 . . . . . . . . .State v. Hon. Grant/Lennar

Does a protective order bar a non-party who is aware of the order from disclosing
information known to be protected by the order?

June 30, 2009 . . . . . . . . .SA 09-0083 . . . . . . . . .Salt River v. Hon. Dunevant/Gravel

1.  Does the superior court have discretion to set a supersedeas bond for less than
the amount of the judgment if the judgment debtor is able to demonstrate that posting
of a full supersedeas bond would subject it to undue financial burden?

2.  In such a situation, can the court require the judgment debtor to post alternate
security for a reduced bond?

June 16, 2009 . . . . . . . . .SA 09-0026 . . . . . . . . .Huerta v. Hon. Nelson/Huerta

May a party that has not exercised a peremptory notice of change of judge 
pursuant to Rule 42(f)(1) prior to consolidation do so after consolidation, if
another party on the same "side" in the consolidated case has already exercised
a peremptory challenge?

June 2, 2009 . . . . . . . . . .SA 09-0015 . . . . . . . . .Arpaio v. Hon. Davis/Mundell

1.  Did the Superior Court violate the substance of the Public Records Law in 
denying the Sheriff's judicial records request pursuant to Rule 123?

2.  Was the administrative review of the judicial records request inconsistent with
the principles of government checks and balances?

3.  Was the request for administrative review timely?

June 2, 2009 . . . . . . . . . .SA 09-0052 . . . . . . . . .State v. Hon. Newell/Milagro

Whether the State can be ordered to complete any scientific testing within a set
time period as a sanction for a putative disclosure violation?

May 22, 2009 . . . . . . . . .SA 09-0077 . . . . . . . . .Alejandro v. Hon. Harrison/State

Does a trial court have discretion to refuse to accept an unconditional, voluntary
and knowing offer to plead guilty to fewer than all counts of an indictment solely
because the State objects to the plea on the ground it interferes with the State's
desire to have a jury trial on all counts of the indictment?

April 30, 2009 . . . . . . . . .SA 08-0269 . . . . . . . . .Jilly v. Hon. Rayes/Carter

Does Arizona Revised Statutes section 12-2603 (2008) conflict with the 
Arizona Supreme Court's rulemaking authority?

March 5, 2009 . . . . . . . . .SA 08-0282 . . . . . . . . .Zenith v. Ballinger/Cassidy

Does Rule 24 allow post-judgment intervention in order to access documents 
shielded by a protection order?

February 26, 2009 . . . . . .SA 09-0011 . . . . . . . . .State v. Donahoe/Osequera

May a trial judge inquire into the source of a defendant's bond funds when the 
State raises a colorable claim that the monies come from drug-trafficking or
other illicit activities?

December 18, 2008 . . . . .SA 08-0263 . . . . . . . . .Patterson v. Mahoney/State

Whether siblings of a murder victim who may be witnesses can be precluded
from being in the courtroom pursuant to Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure
9.3(a) during the trial.

December 4, 2008 . . . . . .SA 08-0237 . . . . . . . . .Reed v. State/Burke

Does the ten-day deadline in Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 10.2(c)
apply to a motion for change of judge when the triggering event is the
withdrawal of a plea under Rule 17.4(g)?

October 30, 2008 . . . . . . SA 08-0205 . . . . . . . .  .Queen Creek v. Gilbert

1.  Who has the burden of proof in a condemnation proceeding on the issue of
whether the condemning authority has complied with Arizona Revised Statutes
section 12-1115(A)?

2.  What is the applicable standard for determining whether a condemning
authority's decision under Arizona Revised Statutes section 12-1115(A) is 
"unnecessarily injurious"?

3.  Is a condemning authority required to balance "least private injury" on both
a collective basis and one that is specific to each landowner?

4.  Did the trial court err in determining that the Town of Gilbert properly 
balanced the "greatest public good" and "least private injury"?

5.  Did the Town of Gilbert, in its application of Arizona Revised Statutes
section 12-1115(A), violate Canyon State Academy's rights to equal
privileges and equal protection under the Arizona Constitution and the
United States Constitution?

July 31, 2008 . . . . . . . . . .SA 08-0102 . . . . . . . . .Nowell v. Rees/State

Do the statutes and rules applicable to determining competency to stand trial
limit the trial court's authority to order restoration to the twenty-one months
after the original finding of incompetency?

April 24, 2008 . . . . . . . . .SA 07-0179/0181). . . . Segura v. Cunanan/State

If a defendant is charged with an offense that makes him not entitled to bail under the
Arizona Constitution, does due process require that a conclusive no-bail determination
may only be made following a full hearing at which the State has the burden of proof
and the defendant has the right to counsel and the right to cross-examine witnesses
and offer evidence?

April 22, 2008 . . . .. . . . . SA 08-0011 . . . . . . . . . NE Phoenix Holdings v. Winkleman

1.  In connection with a proposed auction of state trust lands, did the State Land 
Commissioner appraise certain rights-of-way as required under the Enabling Act
and the Arizona Constitution?

2.  Did the Commissioner's appraisal method of combining the value of the rights-
of-way with the value of the parcel to be leased substantially comply with the 
requirements of the Enabling Act and the Arizona Constitution?

February 26, 2008 . . . . . . . 1 CA-SA 07-0267 . . . . Arpaio v. Baca/Washington

1.  Did the presiding criminal judge for Maricopa County Superior Court exceed
her authority when she held a joint hearing involving cases over which she was not
assigned to resolve the ancillary issue common to all the cases:  whether the reduction
in privileged visiting hours for Maricopa County jail inmates violated their Sixth
Amendment right to access to counsel?

2.  Did the court exceed its authority when it granted injunctive class-style relief to
all of the approximately 10,000 inmates in the Maricopa County jail system?

October 25, 2007 . . . . . . . 1 CA-SA 07-0201 . . . . State v. Contes/Perez

Does the definition of “prohibited possessor” in A.R.S. section 13-3101(A)(6)(e),
which includes persons who are prohibited possessors under 18 U.S.C. section
922(g)(5), as excepted by subsection (y) of that provision, require proof that
possession of any firearm or ammunition affected interstate commerce?

October 2, 2007 . . . . . . . . . 1 CA-SA 07-0092 . . . . . Hernandez v. Lynch/State

Does Proposition 100 apply to those persons who once entered or remained illegally
within the United States but are now legal resident aliens or United States Citizens?

Is Proposition 100 facially constitutional under substantive due process and equal
protection requirements? 

September 18, 2007 . . . . . . . 1 CA-SA 07-0169 . . . . Alexandria M. v. McClennen/State

Can the juvenile court defer an advisory hearing after the juvenile has been found to be
incompetent on an earlier delinquency petition?

September 6, 2007 . . . . . . . 1 CA-SA 07-0065 . . . . . State v. Ditsworth/Patel

Are physician statements, made in response to an investigation by the Arizona
Medical Board, privileged and therefore inadmissible in grand jury proceedings
when the Board determines that a criminal violation involving the delivery of
health care may have occurred?

August 21, 2007 . . . . . . . . 1 CA-SA 07-0124 . . . . . . . State v. Duncan/Reagan

May evidence of justification in a manslaughter case, that would be precluded under
§§ 13-401(A) -412(C) and -417(C), if a justification defense were sought, be admitted
if it is relevant on a separate issue?

July 24, 2007 . . . . . . . 1 CA-SA 07-0078 . . . . . . Town of Gilbert v. Downie/Matykiewicz

Under the relevant statutes related to restitution for contracting without a license, is an
unlicensed contractor entitled to any “offset” for portions of the fee received by the
contractor from the homeowners and allegedly paid over to subcontractors and materialmen?

June 26, 2007 . . . . . . . .. 1 CA-SA 06-0277 . . . . . . . Catrone v. Miles

Are special education records, regardless of the content, privileged?

Can the statutory interest in "confidentiality" of special education records preclude
their disclosure?

June 12, 2007 . . . . . . .  . . . 1 CA-SA 07-0099 . . . . . . Phoenix Newspapers v. Ellis

Is a notice of claim filed with a school district on behalf of an anonymous minor sexual assault victim
a public record?

May 24, 2007 . . . . . . . . . . . 1 CA-SA 06-0197 . . . . . . Heath v. Kiger

Does the phrase “admitted to bail” include a defendant being released on
his own recognizance?

April 26, 2007 . . . . . . . . . . . 1 CA-SA 07-0052 . . . . . . Lincoln v. Holt

1.  Does A.R.S. § 13-4433(H) give the specified parent or legal guardian of
the minor crime victim the right to refuse to submit to a pretrial interview on
that parent’s or legal guardian’s own behalf? 

2.  Is A.R.S. § 13-4433(H) constitutionally valid?

March 30, 2007 . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 CA-SA 06-0208 . . . . . . . . State v. Hon. Slayton/Remmert

Can a defendant be held liable for violating certain sections of Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.)
section 17-309 without establishing any culpable mental state?

January 18, 2007 . . . . . . . . . . .  1 CA-SA 06-0274 . . . . . . . . ADES v. Reinstein

Does a parent whose rights to his or her child who is the subject of ADES termination proceedings and
who has asked for a jury before December 31, 2006 has the right to a jury although the statute granting
that right was repealed effective December 31, 2006?

January 16, 2007 . . . . . . . . . . .  1 CA-SA 06-0114 . . . . . . . . Goddard v. Fields

Is the Attorney General entitled to absolute immunity for allegedly defamatory statements he published 
in a press release?

January 11, 2007 . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 CA-SA 06-0173 . . . . . . . . . State v. Klein/Simpson

Does the definition of "criminal offense" under A.R.S. § 13-4401(6) unconstitutionally limit the Victims' Bill 
of Rights, Ariz. Const. art 2, § 2.1? 

December 19, 2006 . . . . . . . . . . 1 CA-SA 06-0195 . . . . . . . . . Robbins v. Darrow/State

In a misdemeanor prosecution under Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.) section 28-1381 (2004), is the 
existence of a prior DUI conviction an element of the offense created by that statute, or instead, is a 
sentencing enhancer?

November 14, 2006 . . . . . . . . . . . . . SA 06-0193 . . . . . . . . . . .  . State v. Talamante

Is a historical prior felony conviction for a sexual offense an element of the crime of violent
sexual assault as set forth in A.R.S. § 13-1423 that the State must be allowed to present
to the jury in its case-in-chief?

October 24, 2006 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SA 06-0106 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . State v. Gottsfield

Do the Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure and Arizona Ethical Rule 4.2 apply to Sexually Violent Persons 
post-commitment discovery proceedings? 

October 3, 2006 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SA 06-0116 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . State v. Gordon

Under Rule 10.4(b), is a party who has exercised a preemptory change of judge before appeal and remand
entitled, after appeal and remand, to request a change of judge as a matter of right?

August 15, 2006 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SA 06-0006 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . State v. Rayes

May a trial judge remedy a deprivation of effective assistance of counsel occurring when defendant's attorney fails to communicate a plea offer to him before its expiration by compelling the County Attorney to reinstate the plea offer?

August 15, 2006 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SA 06-0130 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Lemke v. Rayes

1.      Does the Double Jeopardy Clause prohibit the State from retrying a defendant for felony murder when the jury at the first trial convicted defendant of theft, the lesser-included of the predicate offense of armed robbery, but was unable to reach a verdict as to the felony murder count?

2. Does the doctrine of constitutional collateral estoppel prevent the State from proving that defendant committed armed robbery, for which he was acquitted at the first trial, as the predicate offense at his second trial for felony murder.

May 23, 20006 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  SA 05-0207 . . . . . . . . . . . . PM v. Gould/Moore

Do the State’s interests in securing an aggravated punishment at a sentencing hearing and the defendant’s due process rights justify a trial court’s order to disclose the victim’s privileged communications with a counselor?  

March 30, 2006 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SA 05-0022 . . . . . . . . . . . . State v. Schneider/Hanna

In appropriate circumstances, may the attorney-client privilege apply to communications between a government official and a government attorney in a grand jury proceeding in which an indictment is sought against the government official?

February 28, 2006 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  SA 05-0129 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Slade v. Schneider

Did the trial court properly determine that the records and information sought by Petitioners is protected under the Confidentiality Statute?

February 23, 2006 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SA 05-0303 . . . . . . . . . . . .  Williams v. Miles

May a trial court comply with the bond requirements set forth in A.R.S. § 12-1182(B) by requiring that bond be posted in an amount sufficient to cover the rental value of the premises pending appeal?

February 14, 2006 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SA 05-0266 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Anderson v. Contes

Is an appellate court remand that may require the presentation of additional evidence on one or more issues in the trial court tantamount to a "new trial" for purposes of Arizona Rule of Civil Procedure 42(f)(1)(E), thereby renewing the parties' right to a peremptory change of judge? 

November 17, 2005 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .SA 05-0183 . . . . . . . . . . P&P Mehta v. Ariz. DLC

When A.R.S. § 12-911(A)(1) states that a stay of an administrative agency's decision may be obtained upon a showing of "good cause," what does good cause mean?

November 1, 2005 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  SA 05-0187 . . . . . . . . . . . .  State v. Jones/Phipps

Is evidence of refusal to perform field sobriety tests admissible in a DUI prosecution?

September 13, 2005 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SA   05-0118. . . . . . . . . . . . . .Phoenix City Prosecutor v. Klausner

Did Derendal v. Griffith, 209 Ariz. 416, 104 P.3d 147 (2005), reverse supreme court precedent that misdemeanor assault cases are not jury eligible?

September 6, 2005 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  SA 05-0190 . . . . . . . . . . . .  Robinson v. State

Does an indigent criminal defendant possess state and federal constitutional rights to choose non-publically funded private counsel to represent his interests in defending criminal charges?

September 1, 2005 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  SA 05-0124 . . . . . . . . . . . . .  State v. Blake/Lugo

Did the trial court err in preventing the State from trying in absentia a criminal defendant released on bail who requested and received voluntary departure from immigration officials, based on the reasoning that the voluntary departure procedure was not truly voluntary?

September 1, 2005   .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SA 05-0001 . . . . . . . State v. Foreman/Phillips

Does A.R.S. § 13-4426.01, which precludes discovery of a victim impact statement before it is given and cross-examination, violate the Sixth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment? 

August 30, 2005 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SA 05-0153 . . . . . . . . . . Astorga v. Greer

Is a state superior court required to stay proceedings before it pending a determination by a tribal court whether it had jurisdiction over a parallel action filed by plaintiffs in tribal court?

August 30, 2005 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SA 05-0112 . . . . . . . . Snyder v. State

Does a case qualify for the Criminal Rule 8.2(a)(3) speedy trial exception for a "complex case" because DNA evidence might be admitted at trial, and the record shows that all delay related to the DNA evidence was caused either by unexcused police delay in obtaining a sample or unexplained laboratory delay in testing?

August 25, 2005 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SA 05-0082 . . . . . . . . . . . .  State v. Levinson

Are defendants charged with misdemeanor DUI’s entitled to a jury trial?

August 4, 2005  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  . SA 05-0089 . . . . . . . . . . . . .  Lana A. v. State 

May a juvenile be subject to predisposition detention when the juvenile was not afforded the right to counsel at her initial incorrigibility hearing?

June 23, 2005 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .SA 05-0061 . . . . . . . Newkirk v. State

Does Derendal require jury trials on allegations of prior convictions?

December 14, 2004 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   SA 04-0140  . . . . . . . . . . .  Waters v. O'Connor/State

How should "clerical status" be determined for purposes of A.R.S. § 13-406(2)(3)?

October 14, 2004 . . . . . . . .  . . .. . . . . . .  SA 04-0180 . . . . . . . . . . .  State v. Conn/Tinnell

Can the state give pretrial notice of aggravating factors under Blakely v. Washington, ___ U.S. ___, 124 S. Ct. 2531 (2004)?

September 21, 2004 . . . . . . . . . . . . . SA 04-0183 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Aragon v. Wilkinson

Did the recent decision in Blakely v. Washington, 124 S. Ct. 2531 (2004), coupled with a defendant’s refusal to waive her right to a jury trial on the existence of factors sufficient to allow the court to impose an aggravated sentence, justify the State’s motion to withdraw from a plea agreement entered with that defendant and previously accepted by the superior court?

August 10, 2004 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  SA 04-0110 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  State v. Dairman

May the trial court appoint a victim’s representative for a minor victim when the defendant is not part of the victim’s “immediate family” as provided in A.R.S. § 13-4403 (C) (2001)?


May 27, 2004 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  SA 04-0052 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Master Financial v. Hillman

Can a plaintiff pursuing a money judgment against a defendant whose residence is unknown but whose last known residence was within the state, or who has avoided service, serve the defendant by publication in accordance with the requirements of Rule 4.1(n) of the Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure? 

May 20, 2004 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  SA 04-0051 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  John C. v. Sargeant/ADES

When the State is attempting to sever a parent's rights to his child due to the length of his incarceration, may his right to a jury trial pursuant to A.R.S. § 8-223 be conditioned on his ability to personally appear when federal authorities refuse to transport him to the severance proceeding? 

April 22, 2004 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  SA -03-0289 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  Levinson v. Lopez

Can an amended complaint that adds a defendant relate back to the date of the original complaint under Rule 15(c) of the Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure without any showing of mistake concerning the identity of the party to be added? 

March 30, 2004 . . . . . . . . . . . . .  SA 04-0054 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  . . .  O'Connor v. Hyatt/State

If a person is placed on probation for a first or second conviction under Proposition 200 and later violates the terms of her probation, may she be given jail time as a condition of her reinstated probation under the pre-November 2002 version of section 13-901.01E?

March 18, 2004 . . . . . . . . . . .   SA 03-0268 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  . Jackson v. State

Did the trial court err by placing Jackson on lifetime probation as a result of a conviction of public
sexual indecency, a class 1 misdemeanor, even though public sexual indecency is an offense included
in title 13, chapter 14 of the A.R.S.?

February 26, 2004 . . . . . . . . . . SA 03-0188  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Simpson v. Owens/State

Is a bail hearing required to determine if "the proof is evident or presumption great," and if so, what is
the standard of proof?  

January 29, 2004 . . . . . . SA 03-0171 . . . . . . . . Orsett/Columbia v. Superior Court

Does A.R.S. § 12-1113 permit a county to condemn a mere leasehold interest in a portion of
a privately-owned shopping center? 

December 4, 2003 . . . . . . . .   SA 03-0185  . . . . . . . . . . Parent v. State

May a sentencing court permit the State to allege prior felony convictions for sentence enhancements after another superior court judge has already accepted the defendant’s guilty plea without any allegations of prior convictions?

October 23, 2003 . . . . . . . . . SA 03-0146 . . . . . . . . .  Behrens v. Behrens

Does good and sufficient cause under A.R.S. § 12-406(B)(3) allow a trial court to transfer venue even after the case was initiated in a proper county? 

October 8, 2003 . . . . . . . . SA 03-0150 . . . . . . . . . . . . .  Standhardt v. Superior Court

Does Arizona's prohibition of same-sex marriages violate petitioners' rights under the federal 
and state constitutions to substantive due process, equal protection, or privacy?

October 1, 2003 . . . . . . SA 02-0108 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Bailey v. City of Mesa

When a governmental entity proposes to condemn and take private property that will be conveyed to private parties for redevelopment purposes, does Article 2, Section 17 of the Arizona Constitution prevent such a taking unless the anticipated public benefits and characteristics substantially outweigh the private nature of the end use? 

September 23, 2003...............SA 02-0270...........................................Raney v. Superior Court

1.  Must the state allege a previous conviction for a defendant to be sentenced under A.R.S. 
§ 13-901.01(F)?

2.  Does a preparatory drug offense qualify as a prior conviction under A.R.S. § 13-901.01?

September 23, 2003...............SA 03-0001..................Raye v. Phoenix City Prosecutor's Office

Does a person charged with violating A.R.S. § 4-244(33) ("underage drinking and driving") have
a right to trial by jury? 

September 23, 2003...............SA 03-0157................................................Cervantes v. State

1.  Whether Criminal Rule 15.1 prohibits the State from copying pornographic material to provide to
the defense for litigation.

2.  Who has the burden of proof in seeking a protective order under Criminal Rule 15.5(a)?

September 16, 2003...............SA 03-0085.......AZ Independent Redistricting v. AZ Minority

1.  Do the members of the Arizona Redistricting Commission possess a legislative privilege?

2.  Does the privilege extend to protect communications with independent contractors hired to
assist the commissioners?

3.  Does the privilege apply to protect documents?

4.  Did the Commission waive any legislative privilege shielding communications with consultants
by designating these consultants as expert witnesses? 

September 2, 2003..................SA 03-0152.......................................................State v. Flath

Do the amendments effectuated by Proposition 103 to Article 2, Section 22, of the Arizona
Constitution and A.R.S. § 13-3961 violate the ex post facto provisions of the state and federal
constitutions? 

June 17, 2003 .........................SA 03-0087 .....................................................Goy v. Jones

Was the Superior Court correct in concluding that a law-enforcement officer testifying during a
criminal trial may read his report as evidence pursuant to Arizona Rule of Evidence ("Rule") 803(5)
permitting such hearsay if the hearsay is of a nature of a "recorded recollection"?

June 12, 2003..........................SA 03-0018.......................................................Sun Health v. North

1.  Does the statutory peer review privilege protect from discovery (a) the statement of reasons for
suspending a doctor; and (b) the medical charts of plaintiff's decedent?

2.  Does the privilege apply to requests for admission of otherwise privileged information?

3.  Does the privilege unconstitutionally abrogate plaintiff's right of action? 

May 8, 2003............................SA 03-0054.................................................................State v. Reyes

A waiver of confidentiality signed by inmates as a condition of participation in a sex offender treatment
program authorizes the disclosure of information but indicates that the waiver does not authorize the 
release of information relating to undocumented sexual misconduct.  The SVP statute requires the
state agency with jurisdiction over the alleged SVP to disclose all psychological and psychiatric 
assessments done on the alleged SVP.  Some of the assessments done in the sex offender treatment
program contain evidence of undocumented sexual misconduct by the alleged SVP. Do the terms
of the waiver prevent the state from disclosing information obtained in the sex offender treatment
program, when the statute compels their disclosure? 

April 8, 2003...........................SA 03-0014.................................................................Boynton v. State

Is the criminal offense of luring a minor for sexual exploitation a "dangerous crime against children"?

March 20, 2003.......................SA 02-0277..................................................................Ugalde v. State

1.  Does A.R.S. § 36-3706 mandate that a person accused of being a sexually violent person (SVP)
must be tried within 120 days after the filing of the petition?

2.  What is the test to be applied by trial courts to determine whether a SVP petition which remains
untried after 120 days must be dismissed?

February 27, 2003 ..................SA 02-0337..................................................................Montero v. State

Did the State have to prove that Defendant's conviction was a "violent" crime at the time it was charged to
later allege that the charge disqualified Defendant for mandatory probation on a drug related charge?

February 7, 2003  . . . . . . .. . . SA 03-0002  . . . . . . . . . Roman Catholic Diocese of Phoenix v. Superior Court

Does the 1994 amendment to the civil attorney-client privilege statute also apply to the criminal attorney-client privilege statute?

January 30, 2003  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SA 02-0153  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Otel H. v. Barton/State

Whether Rule 23(D), Arizona Rules of Juvenile Procedure, allows the juvenile court to base a finding of probable cause for pre-adjudication detention solely on a bare-bones Arizona Traffic Ticket and Complaint?

November 21, 2002   . . . . . . . . . . . . . .SA 02-0250  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jacobson v. Anderson

Is a person declared indigent by the court entitled to have the opportunity to demonstrate to the court that her proposed expert witnesses are reasonably necessary for her defense and, if so, should the experts be retained at government expense?

November 7, 2002  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SA 02-0164  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cherry v. Araneta

Can the trial court determine, as a matter of law, that a defendant has a prior conviction for a "violent crime," and is therefore not eligible for probation pursuant to Proposition 200?

October 29, 2002  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .SA 02-0208  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Demarce v. State

Did the trial judge abuse her discretion by rejecting the defendant's request to revoke his probation and sentence him to a term of incarceration with the Department of Corrections?

July 23, 2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SA 02-0125 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . State v. Landeros

Under Arizona Rule of Evidence 609(a)(1), can the state impeach a defendant with a prior conviction sentenced under A.R.S. § 13-901.01?

June 17, 2002  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SA 02-0073  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May v. Bayless

Is the surcharge levied pursuant to A.R.S. § 16-954(C) constitutional?

April 4, 2002  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SA 01-0312  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Guthrie v. State

In DUI prosecutions, may a defendant introduce evidence, that, although for most individuals the amount of alcohol in 210 liters of their breath is equal to the amount in 100 milliliters of their blood, his individual ratio was greater due to various factors?

April 2, 2002  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .SA 01-0186  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Flood Control v. Paloma

Does A.R.S. § 12-821, which establishes a one-year statute of limitations for bringing "all actions" against any public entity, supercede Maricopa County Municipal Water Conservation Dist. No. 1 v. Warford, 69 Ariz. 1, 206 P.2d 1168 (1949), which held that an inverse condemnation action was timely if brought within the ten-year period necessary for establishing a prescriptive easement? 

March 21, 2002  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SA 01-0246  . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . Welch-Doden v. Welch-Doden

Whether, and on what terms, home state jurisdiction has priority under the UCCJEA when different states compete for initial jurisdiction of a child custody dispute?

February 28, 2002  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SA 01-0160, SA 01-0163, SA 01-0165 . . . . . . . Haas v. Colosi

May the juvenile court appoint the public defender to represent indigent juveniles charged with incorrigibility offenses where there is no risk of detention, under A.R.S. §§ 11-584 and 8-221?

February 7, 2002  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SA 01-0290  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Romley v. Porras-Salazar

Is a superior court order that the victim be fingerprinted to resolve a motion to determine counsel in violation of the Victim's Bill of Rights?

February 5, 2002  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .SA 01-0168  . . . . . . . . . . . . . Blake v. State

Do (1) A.R.S. § 13-3994(A), (F), and (G) require a mandatory initial confinement period of 120 days, and if so, (2) is such a confinement period unconstitutional?

January 15, 2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SA 01-0247 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Encinas v. Suarez

Does an order permitting a party's relative to ask questions and make arguments on that party's behalf conflict with the supreme court's jurisdiction to regulate the practice of law?

December 31, 2001  . . . . . . . . . . . . SA 01-0245  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Fisher v. State

Is sex offender registration for the lifetime of the offender?

December 11, 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . .SA 01-0251  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Van Herreweghe v. State

Does the bail schedule statute, A.R.S. § 22-424, violate a defendant's due process rights by omitting felony DUI from those offenses for which release can be secured by posting the scheduled bail amount?

December 11, 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . SA 01-0262  . . . . . . . . . Dahnad v. AZ State Bd. of Dental Examiners

Does the Board of Dental Examiners have the statutory and constitutional authority to summarily suspend a dental license without a hearing?

November 29, 2001  . . . . . . . . . . . .SA 01-0237 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Arpaio v. ADOC

Does the local sheriff or the department of corrections have the duty to transport prison inmates to court for civil cases?

November 20, 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . .SA 01-0164 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . State v. Medina

In commitment proceedings under the Sexually Violent Person's Act, is a Frye hearing needed to determine whether testifying mental health experts may rely on actuarial models in forming their opinions regarding the likelihood that a person will engage in acts of sexual violence?

August 30, 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .SA 01-0130 . . . . . . . . . . . . . City of Scottsdale v. Adair

Can a phlebotomist be qualified under A.R.S. § 28-1388(A) to draw blood for purposes of determining the alcohol concentration of a person suspected of driving under the influence?

August 16, 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SA 01-0072 SA 01-0109. . Andrews v. Hon. Willrich

Do A.R.S. §§ 8-302(B) and 13-501(B) violate the separation of powers doctrine by vesting exclusive authority in the prosecutor to determine whether juveniles in specified circumstances will be tried as adults?. 

August 9, 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SA 01-0097  . . . . . . . . . . . . Wozniak v. Hon. Galati/State

1.  Does A.R..S. section 13-901.01 mandate a sentence of probation for conviction of A.R.S. section 28-1381(A)(3)(driving while there is a drug or its metabolite in the body)?

2.  Do the results of a drug screening test fail the admissibility test for scientific evidence set forth in Frye?

3.  Is a chemical analysis of a person's blood, breath, or urine necessary to support a conviction for driving while having a drug or its metabolite in the body?

March 8, 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SA 00-0180 . . . . . . . . . . . . Foster v. Arizona State Land Dep't

Pursuant to A.R.S. section 37-301(A), did Petitioner timely protest a proposed auction of public trust land when the protest was made 31 days after publication in a newspaper of general circulation and 30 days after publication in a newspaper nearest the public property?

October 3, 2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SA 00-0198 . . . . . . . . . . . . Walter v. Wilkinson/State

Does use of the term "simultaneously" in section 36-3703(A) of the Sexually Violent Persons Act require that the mental health experts appointed to examine an SVP detainee conduct their examinations at exactly the same time, or may the experts examine the detainee individually and independently?

September 12, 2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SA 00-0054 . . . . . . . . . . . . State v. Porter

May an unlicensed contractor, convicted of the misdemeanor of acting as a residential contractor without a license, be required, by order of restitution, to reimburse a contracting homeowner for the economic damages that the homeowner suffered from the contractor's incomplete and faulty work?

August 24, 2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SA 00-0189 . . . . . . . . . . . . State v. Clements

Is a unanimous verdict of an eight-person jury required before civilly committing a person subject to the Sexually Violent Persons Act?

June 13, 2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SA 00-0039 . . . . . . . . . . . . . State v. Roche

Does the corpus delicti rule apply to a preliminary hearing?

June 13, 2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SA 00-0103 . . . . . . . . . . . . . State v. Thompson

May a person subject to detention under the Sexually Violent Persons Act refuse to be deposed by the state in advance of the hearing on his possible commitment?

June 6, 2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SA 00-0109 . . . . . . . . . . . . . Holt v. Maricopa County

May an individual subject to a psycho-sexual evaluation as required by the Sexually Violent Persons Act be held in contempt of court for refusing to undergo the evaluation?