State v. Lee
Court of Appeals of Arizona
1DissentHoward, Chief Judge
¶ 15 I respectfully dissent because the constitutional and legislative contexts do not support an interpretation of the Victims’ Bill of Rights (VBR) that extends a victim’s right to refuse an interview and deposition to civil proceedings. This court reviews constitutional issues de novo. State v. Moody, 208 Ariz. 424, ¶ 62, 94 P.3d 1119, 1140 (2004).
¶ 16 In interpreting the constitution, our goal is “to effectuate the intent of those who framed the provision and, in the case of an amendment, the intent of the electorate that adopted it.” Jett v. City of Tucson, 180 Ariz. 115, 119, 882 P.2d…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Cooper Manufacturing Co. v. FergusonSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
- State v. MoodyArizona Supreme Court · 2004
- Jett v. City of TucsonArizona Supreme Court · 1994
- State Ex Rel. Morrison v. AnwayArizona Supreme Court · 1960
- Roberts v. SprayArizona Supreme Court · 1950
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.