Earl v. Hon. garcia/state
Court of Appeals of Arizona
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
- State v. AlvarezCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2006
- State v. AlvarezCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2005
- State v. Paris-SheldonCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2007
- Duron v. FleischmanCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1988
3Cited by1 opinion
- State v. RodriguezCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2015