Rebecca White Berch

The case involved Carl Lee Blackman, who was convicted of kidnapping and two counts of sexual assault based on an incident in which a 15-year-old victim with mild to moderate mental retardation was forced to engage in sex with the defendant and multiple other teenage boys over several hours in an abandoned house. On appeal, the defendant challenged the trial court's rulings on jury selection (striking one prospective juror and retaining another), denial of severance from co-defendants (due to admission of a co-defendant's statement), and alleged prosecutorial misconduct in closing arguments. The Arizona Court of Appeals affirmed the convictions and sentences, holding that the trial court properly applied standards for juror impartiality, that any Bruton error from the co-defendant statement was harmless because the jury could follow limiting instructions and the evidence was overwhelming, and that no misconduct occurred. The court exercised jurisdiction under the Arizona Constitution and relevant statutes.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved a dispute within the Arizona Libertarian Party over which faction's chosen leaders were entitled to receive voter registration data, stemming from challenges to state statutes requiring specific procedures for selecting party representatives like precinct committeemen and committee chairs. The Arizona Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision that the statutes in question are constitutional and mandatory for parties with continuing ballot access status. The court reasoned that the statutes impose only incidental burdens on First Amendment rights of speech and association, further important governmental interests in regulating elections, and use mandatory language that must be followed. It reversed only the part holding that the Libertarian Party need not comply with the process.

electionsfree speech

This case involved shareholders of an Arizona air conditioning corporation suing another major shareholder and its board representative for breaches of fiduciary duty, material misrepresentations, negligence, failure to exploit licensed patents, and violations of the Arizona Securities Act. The trial court dismissed the complaint, finding that the plaintiffs had not properly pursued derivative claims under A.R.S. § 10-742 and had not alleged cognizable individual harms. The appellate court affirmed dismissal of the patent exploitation count because no contractual or fiduciary duty ran directly from the defendants to the patent owner, but reversed as to the other counts, holding that certain alleged harms to voting power, stock options, salary, and employment were individual rather than derivative and that the securities claim could proceed; it also noted that the corporation was not closely held so no exception to derivative rules applied.

business & regulatoryprocedure

Jason Wozniak was arrested and charged with driving while impaired and driving with a drug or its metabolite in his body under Arizona statutes. A municipal court jury acquitted him of the impairment charge but convicted him of the metabolite charge, resulting in a jail sentence that the superior court affirmed on appeal. The court of appeals upheld the conviction and sentence, finding the screening urinalysis admissible under the Frye standard for scientific evidence because no challenge was made to the underlying scientific principles, that sufficient evidence supported the verdict, and that the offense was a driving violation not eligible for mandatory probation under A.R.S. § 13-901.01.

criminal lawprocedure

This case involved the Alberta Securities Commission seeking to enforce in Arizona a Canadian judgment for investigative costs against Lawrence Ryckman, who had been found to have manipulated securities markets, and his wife Elaine. The Ryckmans appealed a trial court's grant of summary judgment domesticating the Alberta judgment, arguing due process violations in the Canadian proceedings, the need for additional discovery time, and limits on enforcing the judgment against community or separate property. The Arizona Court of Appeals affirmed the summary judgment, holding that the Canadian process provided a full and fair opportunity to be heard with no demonstrated fraud or prejudice, that denying a continuance was not an abuse of discretion, and that the judgment could be enforced against community property and Lawrence Ryckman's separate property but not Elaine Ryckman's separate property.

business & regulatoryprocedure

The case involved David Benak's appeal of his sentence for possession of a dangerous drug after a jury convicted him of that offense along with resisting arrest and drug paraphernalia possession. The Arizona Court of Appeals held that the trial court should have imposed probation rather than an eight-year prison term because the State did not allege before trial that Benak had a prior conviction for a violent crime rendering him ineligible under A.R.S. § 13-901.01. The court reasoned that state law requires such allegations of violent priors to be charged in the indictment or information to provide notice, and the State's pretrial allegation of nondangerous felony priors was insufficient to satisfy this requirement.

criminal lawprocedure