Search 

Azcourts.gov

Arizona Judicial Branch



FAQ

Register       Login

ATTENTION: This site has been recently moved. If you had an account on our old forum site, you will have to register a new account here in order to be able to post replies.

 

NEW! The Court acted on many pending rule petitions at its August 29, 2017 Rules Agenda.  

Click on the Amendments from Recent Rules Agendas link below to go directly to the amendments and orders for each one.

Message from the Chief Justice

Current Arizona Rules 

Amendments from Recent Rule Agendas

Rule Amendments (2006 to present) 

Advisory Committee on Rules of Evidence


Pending Rules List

         Proposed Local Rules
                 Welcome!
This website allows you to electronically file and monitor court rule petitions and comments and to view existing rules of court, recent amendments of those rules, and pending rule petitions and comments. Any visitor to this site may view posts on this website, but to post a petition or comment you must register and log in. To view instructions on how to register and how to file a petition or comment, please visit our Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) page. 
PrevPrev Go to previous topic
NextNext Go to next topic
Last Post 28 Oct 2013 04:23 PM by  Thom
R-11-0033 Petition to Amend ER 3.8, Rule 42, Arizona Rules of the Supreme Court
 39 Replies
Sort:
Topic is locked
Page 2 of 2 << < 12
Author Messages
Camille Tilley
Posts:

--
21 May 2013 01:13 AM
Camille Tilley
Goodyear, AZ
justice4courtney@mac.com

My comment in support of Petition of Petition to Amend ER 3.8 of the Arizona Rules of Professional Conduct

Arizona has false allegations and wrongful convictions cases that have been swept under the rug for far too many years. The prosecutors have ignored new evidence and exculpatory evidence. Brady violations that they chose to look the other way.

ER 3.8 is a small and necessary step in the right direction. It's time for fair justice after the abuse of power in Maricopa County that has prevailed for years. Manifest injustice cases: Ray Krone, Macumber, Lisa Randall, Debra Milke, Courtney Bisbee, Stephen May and many more.

The County Attorneys and prosecutors have the awesome power over the people with no oversight, no accountability and absolute immunity.

It's time to eliminate absolute immunity for prosecutors after the reign of terror we have all lived under the former Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas and his chief "charging" prosecutor, former Deputy County Attorney Lisa Aubuchon, who both disbarred, April 2012.

They have stained the reputations of prosecutors and their credibility. Their legacy of damage has destroyed our families and many others, as we are victims of their over 200,000 felony cases, in one term in office, that Andrew Thomas bragged about (from 2005-2010).
Attachments
KSwisher
Posts:

--
30 Jun 2013 09:02 PM
PETITIONERS' REPLY IN SUPPORT OF AMENDMENTS TO ER 3.8

Larry Hammond, 4049
ARIZONA JUSTICE PROJECT
c/o Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law
PO Box 875920
Tempe, Arizona 85287-5920
Phone: 602.640.9361
Email: lhammond@omlaw.com

Keith Swisher, 23493
PHOENIX SCHOOL OF LAW*
One North Central Avenue
Suite 1400
Phoenix, Arizona 85004
Phone: 602.432.8464
Email: kswisher@phoenixlaw.edu

Karen Wilkinson, 14095
OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER*
850 West Adams Street
Phoenix, Arizona 85007-2730
Phone: 602.382.2700
Email: Karen_Wilkinson@fd.org
Attachments
REllman
Posts:

--
18 Sep 2013 11:27 AM
Robert L. Ellman
Arizona Solicitor General
1275 W. Washington
Phoenix, AZ 85007
602-542-8986
602-542-8308
SolicitorGeneral@azag.gov
Bar #014410

Comment on revised draft amendments
Attachments
MHarrison
Posts:

--
15 Oct 2013 12:15 PM
Commenters:
Mark I. Harrison, Esq.
Terry Goddard, Esq.
Grant Woods, Esq.
Chief Justice Stanley G. Feldman (ret.)
Chief Justice Frank X. Gordon (ret.)
Chief Justice Charles E. "Bud" Jones (ret.)
Hon. Robert D. Myers (ret.)
Chief Justice Thomas A. Zlaket (ret.)

c/o Mark I. Harrison, No. 001226
Osborn Maledon, PA
2929 N Central Avenue, Suite 2100
Phoenix, AZ 85012
Phone: 602-640-9324
Fax: 602-640-9050
mharrison@omlaw.com

COMMENT OF LAWYERS IN SUPPORT OF PETITION TO AMEND ER 3.8 OF THE ARIZONA RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT.

Attachments
tlborden
Posts:

--
20 Oct 2013 07:32 PM
Terry and Patricia Borden
Phoenix
tlborden@gmail.com

We support adoption of the proposed changes to ER 3.8. Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery claims there are no wrongful convictions in Arizona. He is WRONG. In their comments on 6/30/2013 (16302167654.pdf) Larry Hammond et.al. cite 4 cases where there was wrongful convictions and the prosecution had access to material exculpatory evidence. Moreover recently Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas was disbarred for prosecutorial misconduct and Bill Montgomery was admonished by a judge for failure to disclose material to the judge in the possible retrial of Debra Milke. It is clear that wrongful convictions regrettably occur. These proposed changes are needed to protect Arizona citizens. Justice will be better served if Arizona’s ethics rules clearly define the prosecutor's obligations when in presence of possible exculpatory nature.

Finally, “You can only protect your liberties in this world by protecting the other man’s freedom. You can only be free if I am free.” (Clarence Darrow)
Susan Chandler
Posts:

--
22 Oct 2013 05:02 PM
Susan Chandler
Multi-state public corruption victim, innocence advocate, blogger
Fort Pierce, Florida
wobblywarriors@comcast.net

I support the proposed changes to ER 3.8, Rule 42, Arizona rules of the Supreme Court in the same manner in which I support state rule changes anywhere that will better ensure the availability and quality of justice.

Part of said manner of support is this: I am aware that are fundamentally flawed U.S. Supreme Court rulings that serve to protect prosecutors and their supervisors ahead of the public at large, specifically Imbler v Pachtman, Van de Kamp v Goldstein, Brady v Maryland and Connick v Thompson. What they all boil down to is ridiculous requirements for review of darkly clouded convictions, topped by timelines so constrictive and punitive that they apply even to death sentences. Warehousing (or killing) innocents while actual criminals remain free is the most daft and dreadful misappropriation of public funds I can conceive of, aside from dropping drones on very young and very old civilians and claiming "surgical precision" in doing so.

I am also aware that the American Bar Association's Government and Public Sector Lawyers Division, a "Self Regulating Organization," is laying their claim to "promoting the integrity and excellence" of public lawyers, but is instead allowing public lawyers whose misconduct is open, notorious and serial to remain lawyers, and advance their careers to have a broader range of individuals to harm. I am further aware that the American Bar Association's tax exemption is based upon equally serving its members and the public, was tasked by SCOTUS in Imbler v Pachtman with public attorney oversight in 1976, and is enjoying exemption from taxes while flouting not only the basis of exemption but the Justice's ruling. Generous Bar disbursements to innocence organizations may be agenda-laden.

I am additionally aware, through direct contact over a number of years, that all of the above is known to and ignored by the Justice Department, the FBI, the IRS, the Treasury Department, Senate Intelligence Oversight, etc. ... all are apparently far more concerned about reputations remaining untarnished as regards their inexcusably poor follow-up on the FBI announcing discredited forensic analysis techniques (Comparative Bullet Lead Analysis, hair and fiber analysis) as well as their failure to announce - yet alone follow-up on - their affiliations with discredited forensics experts, including an assortment of charlatan dog handlers. As the FBI taught their discredited hair and fiber analysis techniques to law enforcement officers nationwide, it is likely that no state remains unaffected. Generous Justice Department disbursements to innocence organization may be agenda-laden.

Finally, I am painfully aware that the mainstream media is all-too-willing to downplay any facet of the unavailability of justice, apparently in trade for approving nods for mergers and acquisitions and perhaps other untoward regulatory favors. I've confronted reporters over misrepresentations of fact concerning standing convictions, and haven't found one willing to make even a minor correction. A self-fettered press is worse than worthless, and that's what we have. They show up when the next exoneration occurs, exonerations that would have escalated to hundreds per year were the media willing to adroitly address the issue of Bar responsibility for bad actors' actions. The media publish or broadcast the trite and untrue exoneration script, "I'm not bitter. I'm only looking forward. I'm glad that justice was finally served." How bitter a pill to recite that last sentence, knowing that those who intimidated witnesses, coached jailhouse informant testimony, deployed a knowingly discredited forensic expert and/or misrepresented evidence, etc., are not being held accountable for anything. This isn't the full extent of the media dystopia, i.e.; Edward Snowden's secure hold on four laptops was never compared and contrasted to the FBI's 160 "lost" laptops that Senate Oversight was initially so intensely interested in. Only the alternate media is willing to point out who's lying and who's not, even when our nation faces fiscal ruin. A handful of multi-billionaire moguls control most of the mainstream media, and they're as little concerned about the ruined lives of incarcerated innocents and their families as they are any other inherent rights issue; they believe that rights are something you buy as necessary, not something available to all, inherently.

In this any-port-in-a-storm context, as a public corruption victim who has been denied the pursuit of happiness for the better part of 35 years and as the concerned-to-distraction advocate for incarcerated innocents, including Courtney Bisbee, I support the Amendment of ER 3.8, Rule 42, Arizona Rules of the Supreme Court.
KSwisher
Posts:

--
22 Oct 2013 11:16 PM
Jennifer Thompson
c/o Keith Swisher
Phoenix School of Law
One North Central Avenue
Phoenix, AZ 85004
kswisher@phoenixlaw.edu



COMMENT OF VICTIM AND AUTHOR JENNIFER THOMPSON IN SUPPORT OF PETITION TO AMEND ER 3.8 OF THE ARIZONA RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT
Attachments
mlubas2
Posts:

--
23 Oct 2013 11:19 AM
MaryAnn Lubas
Pennsylvania Director of the Freedom March for the Wrongfully Convicted
mlubas2@yahoo.com

I am SHOCKED that Attorney Bill Montgomery states that there are no wrongful convictions in Arizona!!! I know of at least 3 cases as I write that are wrongfully imprisoned and there have been eight exonerated in Arizona from death row alone! That is 11 too many!!!! Arizona is right in the middle for exonerations from all the states.

You have had attorney's disbarred for prosecutorial misconduct. Prosecutors cannot
be above the law!!!! They must have oversight and be held responsible for their errors. I strongly support the adoption of the proposed changes to ER 3.8.

A nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people.
John F. Kennedy

kmac1411
Posts:

--
23 Oct 2013 05:33 PM
SHEILA POLK (007514)
ELIZABETH ORTIZ (012838)
ARIZONA PROSECUTING ATTORNEY’S ADVISORY COUNCIL
1951 W. CAMELBACK RD. SUITE 202
PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85015
TELEPHONE: (602) 542-7222
FAX: (602) 274-4215

Sheila Polk: Sheila.Polk@yavapai.us
Elizabeth Ortiz: elizabeth.ortiz@apaac.az.gov

Attachments
Gary.Restaino@usdoj.gov
Posts:

--
23 Oct 2013 06:59 PM
Commenters:

JOHN R. EVANS
Arizona Bar. No. 05797
Assistant United States Attorney
District of Arizona
405 W. Congress Street
Tucson, Arizona
Tel: (520) 620-7514
John.Evans2@usdoj.gov

GARY M. RESTAINO
Arizona Bar No. 017450
Assistant United States Attorney
District of Arizona
40 N. Central Avenue
Suite 1200
Phoenix, Arizona 85004
Tel: (602) 514-7500
Gary.Restaino@usdoj.gov

THIRD SET OF COMMENTS OF THE U.S. ATTORNEY'S OFFICE FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
Attachments
barbara.PimaCountyAttorney@pca
Posts:

--
25 Oct 2013 10:51 AM
Barbara LaWall
Pima County Attorney
Pima County Attorney's Office
32 N. Stone Avenue
Tucson, AZ 85701
520-740-5622
520-740-5495-FAX
Az State Bar No. 004906
barbara.pimacountyattorney@pcao.pima.gov

Attachments
domanico
Posts:

--
25 Oct 2013 11:35 AM
WILLIAM G. MONTGOMERY
MARICOPA COUNTY ATTORNEY
(FIRM STATE BAR NO. 00032000)

MARK FAULL
CHIEF DEPUTY
301 WEST JEFFERSON STREET, SUITE 800
PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85003
TELEPHONE: (602) 506-3800
(STATE BAR NUMBER 011474)

(domanico@mcao.maricopa.gov)

R-11-0033

MARICOPA COUNTY ATTORNEY’S COMMENTS TO SUPREME COURT ORDER AND PROPOSED CHANGES TO ER 3.8 AND 3.10.
Attachments
AZStateBar
Posts:

--
25 Oct 2013 02:35 PM
John A. Furlong, Bar No. 018356
General Counsel

Patricia A. Sallen, Bar No. 012338
Deputy General Counsel
State Bar of Arizona
4201 N. 24th Street, Suite 100
Phoenix, AZ 85016-6266
602.252.4804
John.Furlong@staff.azbar.org
Patricia.Sallen@staff.azbar.org
Attachments
Phillisc
Posts:

--
25 Oct 2013 05:04 PM
Christina M. Phillis,
Arizona Bar Membership No. 014871
Arizona Public Defender Association
777 W. Southern Ave., Ste. 101
Mesa, Arizona 85210
Telephone (602) 372-2815
Fax (602) 372-8919
Email Juv-SE@mail.maricopa.gov


Attachments
KBrody
Posts:

--
25 Oct 2013 06:13 PM
Commenter: Arizona Attorneys For Criminal Justice

c/o Kathleen E. Brody
Osborn Maledon, P.A.
2929 N. Central Avenue, Suite 2100
Phoenix, AZ 85012
Phone: 602-640-9387
Fax: 602-640-9050
kbrody@omlaw.com
Attachments
KSwisher
Posts:

--
26 Oct 2013 12:08 AM
PETITIONERS' FINAL REPLY IN SUPPORT OF AMENDMENTS TO ER 3.8

Larry Hammond, 4049
ARIZONA JUSTICE PROJECT
c/o Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law
PO Box 875920
Tempe, Arizona 85287-5920
Phone: 602.640.9361
Email: lhammond@omlaw.com

Keith Swisher, 23493
PHOENIX SCHOOL OF LAW*
One North Central Avenue
Suite 1400
Phoenix, Arizona 85004
Phone: 602.432.8464
Email: kswisher@phoenixlaw.edu

Karen Wilkinson, 14095
OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER*
850 West Adams Street
Phoenix, Arizona 85007-2730
Phone: 602.382.2700
Email: Karen_Wilkinson@fd.org
Attachments
Camille Tilley
Posts:

--
26 Oct 2013 03:51 AM
Camille Tilley
Goodyear Az
camtil@mac.com

THIS IS MY SECOND COMMENT. First comment with attachments May 20, 2013,

I support the Petition to Amend ER 3.8 and 3.10 draft, as well as the suggestions made by Kathleen E. Brody, Osborn Maledon, and Christina M. Phillis, Arizona Public Defender Assoc.

see attachments.
Attachments
Camille Tilley
Posts:

--
27 Oct 2013 12:27 AM
Camille Tilley
Goodyear AZ
camtil@mac.com
http://www.change.org/petitions/hel...cent-woman

MCAO Bill Montgomery and Mark Faull, chief deputy write in their "comment" to the Arizona Supreme Court
judges, that there are no wrongful convictions in Arizona, no new evidence, no exculpatory evidence (May 17, 2013.

AG Horne will write there are no Brady violations in Arizona (May 20, 2013). They are wrong and are simply refusing to acknowledge the reality of Maricopa County and Arizona's history of injustice. Convictions at all cost.

As we have witnessed, a politicized justice system is no justice system at all.

The caseload created by the prosecutors has overwhelmed the courts, jails and prisons. In reading their comments, the prosecutors appear to care only for themselves and not innocent or the taxpayers, or they would support the Petition to Amend ER 3.8 and 3.10, a watered down version of the ABA original written back in 2008.

"Righting the wrongs" of wrongful convictions by the ministers of justice would be expected of prosecutors with a sense of conscience and integrity.

A few links follow, to a few wrongful convictions cases, listed to remind the prosecutors and to show the judges what the prosecutors are ignoring.

Those mentioned in MCAO's comment Oct. 25, 2013, who were falsely accused and not convicted, also have their lives destroyed, like the 14 defendants arrested for "huffing", only for it to be a a costly "mistake".

A Look at Exonerations in Shaken Baby Syndrome Cases - Page 1 - News - Phoenix - Phoenix New Times
http://bit.ly/19IOVYO

AZ: Lisa Randall, a Wrongly Charged Former Peoria Daycare Operator, Benefited Greatly From Andrew Thomas' Departure - Page 1 - News - Phoenix - Phoenix New Times
http://bit.ly/1hjIVJV

AZ: "Mom freed; served 7 years for heist she didn't commit" Feb. 7, 2008
http://bit.ly/16BIEQm

Example of an agency who knew and did nothing, like the detective in the Debra Milke case:

"Jernigan learned of Gallegos' arrest in 2001 in a prison-yard conversation and immediately notified her attorneys.
By then, FBI agents were aware of the women's similarities, Jernigan's attorneys say, but failed to inform prosecutors or Jernigan's defense team."
Camille Tilley
Posts:

--
28 Oct 2013 01:03 AM
Camille Tilley
Goodyear AZ
camtil@mac.com
http://www.change.org/petitions/hel...cent-woman

This timely special report appeared in the Sunday edition, Oct. 27, 2013, of the Arizona Republic which should be included in the comments to the Arizona Supreme Court. Once again, this shows why we support the Petition to Amend ER 3.8 and 3.10, which should be read by all. This series was researched and written as part of a fellowship with The Guggenheim Foundation and the John jay College of Criminal Justice in New York City.

New PROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT Special Report (cover page plus two full pages) by Michael Kiefer, Arizona Republic, Sunday edition, Oct. 27, 2013

A four-part series, Oct. 27, 28, 29, and 30th, 2013.

"When Prosecutors Get Too Close to the Line: The Gray Area of Courtroom Conduct" (part 1 of 4)

"Prosecutorial misconduct alleged in half of capital cases"
http://bit.ly/18tmF8F

---------------

New Empirical Study: PROSECUTORS, Not Police, Have Driven Prison Population Growth
http://bit.ly/1gUh3OU

"The United States prison population has exploded over the past 40 years. But why? Have police been making more arrests? Have prosecutors been charging more people with crimes? Have judges been issuing longer sentences? Have parole boards become stricter? (All of the above?) Since many accounts of mass incarceration collapse “the criminal justice system” into a single monolith, it can be hard to know exactly what part of the system has driven the growth in the prison population.

A new empirical study by Fordham law professor John Pfaff aims to provide a more granular explanation of the causes of mass incarceration. Pfaff concludes that only one other relevant number has changed as dramatically as the prison population has: the number of felony case filings per arrest. In other words, police haven’t been arresting more people"

-----------

See my other comments dated May 21, 2013, Oct. 25, 26 with supporting documents.
Thom
Posts:

--
28 Oct 2013 04:23 PM
R. Thomas
Sun City West, AZ
grthom@q.com


Gentlemen:

I support the amendment to ER 3.8. Prosecutor and Maricopa County Attorney are falsifying information to the public when claiming that no innocent person has been convicted in Arizona. There has, no doubt, been several, but I know of one for sure--Ray Krone! Nationwide, the number is over 1,233 innocent individuals that has cost taxpayers millions of dollars in lawsuits; as well as destroying the lives of their friends and family. Just in today news, two in Washington State are declared innocent--AFTER spending 17 years in prison!

Prosecutors have a 95% or more conviction rate due to "plea bargains" that is nothing more than bribery. Bribery is a violation of Article II, Sec. 4 of our U.S. Constitution. Laws that allow immunity for prosecutors who abuse their power and destroy lives is immoral and evil.

Exoneration Detail List - 1,233 Exonerations; 12 exonerated in Arizona

http://www.law.umich.edu/special/ex...aspx?View={faf6eddb-5a68-4f8f-8a52-2c61f5bf9ea7}&SortField=ST&SortDir=Asc

Cruz Robert 33 Hispanic AZ Murder Death 1981 1995 Y
Fish Harold 57 Caucasian AZ NC Murder 10 years 2006 2009
Girdler, Jr. Ray 36 Caucasian AZ Murder Life 1982 1991 Y Y
Grannis David 21 Caucasian AZ Murder Death 1991 1996 Y
Krone Ray 34 Caucasian AZ Murder Death 1992 2002 Y Y Y
McCrimmon Christopher 20 Black AZ Murder Death 1993 1997 Y Y
Minnitt Andre 21 Black AZ Murder Death 1993 2002 Y Y
Peak Carolyn June 39 Caucasian AZ F Murder Not sentenced 2000 2003 Y
Prion Lemuel 30 Caucasian AZ Murder Death 1999 2003
Robison James Albert 53 Caucasian AZ CDC Murder Death 1977 1993 Y
Watkins John 18 Caucasian AZ P Sexual Assault 14 years 2004 2010 Y Y Y
Witt Drayton 18 Caucasian AZ NC, SBS Murder 20 years 2002 2012

ARIZONA BRADY VIOLATION CASES:
Canion v. Cole, 208 Ariz. 133, 91 P.3d 355
It is true that, by its words, Rule 15.1 does not apply to PCR proceedings, but to agree with the State that this is conclusive would allow the prosecution that unlawfully failed to disclose exculpatory information in a timely manner to continue to evade that duty and thwart the due process of law to which an accused is entitled. The Arizona Supreme Court held in State v. Schreiber, 115 Ariz. 555, 556, 566 P.2d 1031, 1032 (1977), that a Rule 32 petition should be granted when the prosecution's non-disclosure of evidence denied the petitioner's right to due process, citing the United States and Arizona Constitutions. Remand was required after defendant showed good cause and made colorable allegations of newly discovered materials.

Martin-Costa v. Kiger, 235 P.3d 1040
While the parent of a minor crime victim had limited standing to enforce any right guaranteed to the victim, neither the Victims' Bill of Rights under Ariz. Const. art. 2, § 2.1, Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-4401 et seq., nor Ariz. R. Crim. P. 39 granted a crime victim the right to seek disqualification of the trial judge or defense counsel.

State v. Talmadge, 196 Ariz. 436
In criminal child abuse case, trial court's ruling preventing Scottish expert on temporary brittle bone disease from testifying as defense expert witness was an abuse of discretion, and the error was reversible.

9TH CIRCUIT COURT- BRADY VIOLATION CASES:
Edmond v. Collins, 8 F.3d 290 (5th Cir. 1993)
US v. Brumel - Alverez, 976 F.2d 1235 (9th Cir. 1992)
Brady doctrine requires prosecution to produce exculpatory evidence and evidence useful for impeachment when requested to do so by defendant.

Bartholomew v. Wood, 34 F.3d 870 (9th Cir. 1994)
Prosecution's failure to disclose material and favorable evidence to defendant will violate due process under BRADY, even when defendant makes no request for such evidence.
US v. Aichele, 941 F.2d 761 (9th Cir. 1991)
To escape BRADY sanction, disclosure must be made at time when disclosure would be of value to accused.

US v. Hanna, 55 F.3d 1456 (9th Cir. 1995)
1. "Brady material" is any evidence material either to guilt or punishment which is favorable to accused, irrespective of good faith or bad faith of prosecution.
2. Prosecutor's duty to reveal BRADY materials does not depend on request by defense.

US v. Zuno - Arce, 44 F.3d 1420 (9th Cir. 1995)
Under Brady, exculpatory evidence cannot be kept out of hands of defense just because prosecutor does not have it, where investigating agency does.

Thank you,
R. Thomas
Sun City West, AZ
grthom@q.com
Topic is locked
Page 2 of 2 << < 12