FAQ

Register       Login

YOUR HELP NEEDED: If you find a cross-reference that does not match the rule or subsection it refers to or any apparent clerical errors, please let us know by sending a precise description to [email protected].



Message from the Chief Justice

Current Arizona Rules on Westlaw

 

Amendments from Recent Rule Agendas
 

Rule Amendments (2006 to present) 

 

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. 

BEFORE POSTING, PLEASE READ: 

Contact Information

Please include all of your contact information when submitting a rule petition or comment.  Otherwise, your submission may be rejected and we will be unable to advise you as to why. 

     
PrevPrev Go to previous topic
NextNext Go to next topic
Last Post 18 May 2007 11:31 AM by  sbruner
R-06-0028 Petition to amend Rule 28.1(b) of the Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure and Rules 94(h) and 124(c)(2) of the Arizona Supreme Court Rules.
 2 Replies
Sort:
Topic is locked
Author Messages
nasha
Posts:

--
31 Oct 2006 03:45 PM
    R-06-0028

    PETITION TO AMEND RULE 28.1(b), ARIZONA RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE & RULE 94(h), ARIZONA SUPREME COURT RULES REGARDING DESTRUCTION OF PAPER CASE FILE RECORDS AND RULE 124(c)(2), ARIZONA SUPREME COURT RULES REGARDING THE ELECTRONIC ORIGINAL

    TO ALLOW SUPERIOR COURT CLERKS TO CREATE AN ELECRONIC IMAGE AS THE ORIGINAL AND TO DISPOSE OF THE PAPER FILINGS PREVIOUSLY CONSIDERED THE ORIGINAL CASE FILE RECORDS

    Petitioner:
    Michael K. Jeanes
    Clerk of the Superior Court
    in and for Maricopa County
    201 W. Jefferson St
    Phoenix AZ 85003
    Phone 602-506-3760
    Fax 602-506-7684
    [email protected]

    Filed October 31, 2006

    COMMENT PERIOD CLOSED AS OF MAY 21, 2007.
    Attachments
    nasha
    Posts:

    --
    18 May 2007 11:27 AM
    Juanita Mann, President
    Arizona Association of Superior Court Clerks
    P.O. Box 668
    Holbrook, AZ 86025
    928-524-4176
    [email protected]
    Attachments
    sbruner
    Posts:

    --
    18 May 2007 11:31 AM
    Commenter’s Name Stewart Bruner

    Committee Name, if applicable Commission on Technology, Staff

    Mailing Address 1501- W. Washington, Suite 415

    Phone Number 602-452-3351

    FAX Number 602-452-3480

    E-mail Address [email protected]

    Commission on Technology (COT) will not meet before the comment period ends and has no rules review subteam, but was requested by Committee on the Superior Courts to comment, so I'm submitting ITD staff's comments regarding proposed changes to Rule 28.1(b) Criminal Prcdr and Supreme Court Rule 94 (h).

    I see no issue with the wording of the proposed changes themselves. I'm concerned about the statement of effectivity and the lack of definition for "comprehensive electronic court record plan" in the introduction.

    The implication is that only clerks having an approved "comprehensive electronic court record plan" will be allowed to apply the revised rule and destroy paper records. It's not clear what one is or who approves it for AOC. I assume the rule applies to all levels of court, making creation of the plan a requirement for limited jurisdiction courts.

    My guess is that creation of the plan relates to Rule 124 Requirement b.1 which states that a court must have developed an electronic filing plan that meets the administrative requirements before implementing an e-filing system. Those administrative requirements are codified in ACJA 1-506.

    Following Maricopa's lead would require each court's presiding judge and clerk to "certify" the court meets each requirement and have AOC officially agree, possibly through an AJC motion since the introductory text says "Judicial Council."

    AOC must define a format and process for seeking and obtaining approval of the required plan in advance of the rules change being approved. It must communicate that process to every court in the state, not just the superior courts.

    Also, 1-506 specifies some lofty technological requirements:

    - That at an electronic copy must always be available,
    - That backups must be performed at least daily, and
    - That non-reuseable media be used for archiving.

    Those are all tall orders in many superior courts outside Maricopa and Pima, and even taller orders in imited jurisdiction courts. So if the "plan" is the one referred to in 1-506, a barrier to inclusion in the effective group likely still exists even though the rules revisions are supposed to be making destruction of paper easier.

    Again, these are the comments of staff and not of the COT as a body. Thank you.

    Topic is locked