State v. DeRose
Court of Appeals of Arizona
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BIRDSALL, Judge.
The real party in interest, the defendant in pending prosecutions, invoked Rule 15.3, Rules of Criminal Procedure, 17 A.R.S., requesting the respondent court to allow him to depose a prosecution witness, the victim of the charged offenses. The motion was granted and the State has sought special action relief, claiming the respondent court abused its discretion. We believe appellate intervention is appropriate and assume jurisdiction.
Rule 15.3(a)(2) gives the court discretion to order the examination of any person except the defendant upon oral deposition when:
“A party…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- State v. DeddensCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1976
- Kirkendall v. FisherCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1976
3Cited by4 opinions
- Murphy v. SUPER. CT. IN & FOR MARICOPA COUNTYArizona Supreme Court · 1984
- State Ex Rel. Baumert v. SUPERIOR COURT, ETC.Arizona Supreme Court · 1982
- State ex rel. McDougall v. Municipal CourtCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1987
- State ex rel. Dean v. City CourtCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1981