Arizona jails and prisons have measures in place to assure no criminal activity is in progress related to the defendant’s communications.
Authorized jail and prison officials screen mail, and record suspects’ phone calls.
The information they obtain may be used to prosecute pending or future criminal charges. The exception to this would be privileged communications between a defendant and their criminal attorney.
The Arizona Supreme Court recently ruled that enhanced sentencing does not apply if the victim is fictitious.
Under Arizona’s Dangerous Crimes against Children statute (DCAC), a person convicted of a sexual crime against a child is subject to enhanced sentencing. These penalties are severe and designed to provide greater punishments to those convicted of the offenses.
The question for the Court in this case was whether or not enhanced sentencing should be imposed under A.R.S. § 13-705(P) (1), when there was no actual victim.
Currently the state of Arizona limits circumstances in which firearms can be carried onto school grounds.
Unless specifically outlined by law, carrying a loaded firearm on any school grounds will result in criminal charges under Arizona’s Weapons Misconduct law A.R.S. 13- 3102(12).
This article outlines the weapons misconduct laws related to guns on school grounds, threatening and intimidation (assault) laws; and criminal defense for weapons misconduct and assault charges.
In Arizona, we recently learned of a tragic story.
Police officers answered a domestic dispute, and the suspect was fatally shot by police.
When the officer arrived on scene, he encountered a woman outside a home.
♦ Featuring Tips from Authorities: How to Safely Respond (or not) to Road Rage ♦
Our Federal and State Constitutions afford us the right to bear arms, to protect ourselves, our families, and others from immediate harm due to serious crimes in progress.
So why then, must we be concerned with facing criminal charges if we exercise those rights?
The answer to this question is two-fold:
First there’s a fine line between what we may feel is justified and what the language of the law dictates.
Second, the police, prosecution, court and jury may not feel the actions were as justified as we did under the same circumstances.
So while it is true we have these rights, we must be prepared to defend our actions.
In this article we outline a recent Arizona Court of Appeals case that began as a road rage incident.
The defendant was convicted of Aggravated Assault with a deadly weapon. He appealed his conviction, challenging the jury instructions provided in the trial.
At the heart of the case were two important legal concepts, that proved to be central to the verdicts:
The discussion topics in this article are broken down into the following 8 segments:
Part I – The Incident
The defendant was driving with his fiancé and her 4 year old daughter in the vehicle.
Following a minor traffic mishap, another driver began honking and tailgating them.
The angry driver (victim) pulled up alongside the defendant’s vehicle in road rage.
The angry driver waved a gun while pulled up next to their vehicle, frightening the passengers.
At the next stop light, the defendant got out of his vehicle, and brandished his own gun.
The defendant stood there, with his gun. But he did not move to harm the victim;
The light turned green. The defendant got back in his vehicle, and drove away.
The victim continued to chase him, and ran two red lights in the process.
The victim then called #9-1-1 reported the defendant.
The Police dispatcher repeatedly urged the victim to stop chasing the defendant, and to return to a nearby shopping center to meet an awaiting police officer.
The victim did not immediately obey the dispatcher, but did finally retreat and return to the shopping center.
The victim then took a detour to another area of the shopping center before meeting the officer.
Once stopped, the officer searches the victim’s vehicle but did not find any weapons. The victim denies having a gun.
The defendant was subsequently charged with aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.
The defendant chose to go to trial to prove his innocence.
The jury found the defendant guilty. He was sentenced to 5 years in prison for Aggravated Assault with a deadly weapon. Read More… Continue reading
Arizona Criminal Defense Attorney Blog