State of Arizona v. Dustin Gill
Arizona Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
CHIEF JUSTICE BALES,
opinion of the Court:
V 1 Arizona Rule of Evidence 410(a)(4) requires a court to exclude statements made by a defendant during plea discussions with a prosecutor if the discussions do not result in a guilty plea. This case concerns whether statements made in furtherance of a deferred prosecution agreement are protected by Rule 410(a)(4). We hold that this evidentiary rule does not apply to discussions about deferred prosecution and that a knowing waiver of its provisions does not require specifically referencing the rule.
I
¶ 2 In 2013, a private security guard found Dustin…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Moran v. BurbineSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- United States v. MezzanattoSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- State v. TuckerArizona Supreme Court · 2007
- United States v. Walter LevyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1978
- State v. SUPERIOR COURT, ETC.Arizona Supreme Court · 1980
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- State of Arizona v. James Clayton JohnsonArizona Supreme Court · 2019
- State of Arizona v. Darren Lee WinegardnerArizona Supreme Court · 2018
- J v. v. Hon blair/morrisCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2023
- Fisher v. Rondo PoolsCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2019
- Fisk v. HurricaneCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2018
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.