Legal Opinion

Earl v. Hon. garcia/state

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided May 15, 2014No. 1 CA-SA 13-0096PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

JOHNSEN, Judge.

¶ 1 Rule 8 of the A’izona Rules of Criminal Procedure requires a defendant to be tried within a specified time period, and Rule 16.6(a) precludes the prosecution from voluntarily dismissing a charge to avoid the Rule 8 deadline. Daniel Jay Earl argues the State *578violated these rules by dismissing a theft charge against him on the eve of the deadline because it was unprepared to go to trial and re-filing the same charge to start the Rule 8 clock running anew. We decline jurisdiction of EaiTs petition for special action.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

¶ 2 Earl was charged by…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. State v. AlvarezCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2006
  2. State v. AlvarezCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2005
  3. State v. Paris-SheldonCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2007
  4. Duron v. FleischmanCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1988

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. State v. RodriguezCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2015

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API