Case: State v. Washington

07-156830 | Arizona state trial court

Filed Date: Sept. 5, 2007

Closed Date: June 3, 2008

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

This is a criminal case in which certain constitutional challenges were made as to the operations of the Maricopa County Jail. Due to funding constraints, the Maricopa County Sheriff reallocated personnel and reduced privileged visitation hours at County jail facilities, effective November 14, 2007. The Maricopa County Public Defender's Office, which represented criminal defendants confined in the County jails, sought injunctive relief to restore the previous privileged visitation schedule. The…

This is a criminal case in which certain constitutional challenges were made as to the operations of the Maricopa County Jail. Due to funding constraints, the Maricopa County Sheriff reallocated personnel and reduced privileged visitation hours at County jail facilities, effective November 14, 2007. The Maricopa County Public Defender's Office, which represented criminal defendants confined in the County jails, sought injunctive relief to restore the previous privileged visitation schedule. The Public Defender argued that the Sheriff's actions impinged upon the criminal defendants' Sixth Amendment right to counsel.

Judge Anna M. Baca, the presiding criminal court judge for the Maricopa County Superior Court, consolidated motions for injunctive relief in numerous criminal cases (State v. Clarence Dixon, CR2002-019595-001; State v. Dionicio Vargas, CR2006-175092-001; State v. Robert Hernandez CR2007-119475-001 and CR2007-155927-001; State v. Irma Garcia, CR2005-129847-001; State v. Juan Manual Godinez-Morales, CR2007-146854-001; State v. Shawn King, CR2005-014314-001, CR2005-111076, CR2006-012775-001; State v. Miciah Sumpter, CR2006-008209-001, CR2006-134110-001, CR2006-156634-001, CR2007-155510-001, CR2007-143417-001; State v. Casey Romero, CR2007-148305-001; State v. Roberto Vega, CR2006-048861-001; State v. Raymond Musgrove CR2007-148283- 001, CR2003-021314-001; State v. Natalie Rose Herrera Engler, CR2006-166117-001; State v. Ronnie Guilford, CR2006-162702-001; and APD Motion (filed in State v. Ozie Washington, CR2007-156830-001) and conducted an eight-day evidentiary hearing beginning on November 20, 2007.

Following the hearing, Judge Baca concluded that the Sheriff's new schedule for privileged visits violated the in-custody criminal defendants' Six Amendment rights to counsel and access to the courts. The Judge therefore entered an interim order extending the hours of privileged visitation at all jail facilities and further ordered that the parties participate in mediation to permanently resolve the issue. The Sheriff sought relief from the Arizona Court of Appeals.

The Court of Appeals found that the presiding criminal trial judge had authority to conduct a consolidated hearing to resolve the criminal defendants' constitutional claim that the Sheriff's new privileged visitation schedule denied them access to counsel. The Appeals Court, however, concluded that the trial judge exceeded her authority by granting injunctive, class-action type relief in these criminal cases and that she had no authority to compel the Sheriff to participate in mediation. Arpaio v. Baca, 77 P.3d 312 (Ariz.App. Div. 1 Feb 26, 2008).

On June 3, 2008, review was denied. The case is now closed.

Summary Authors

Dan Dalton (3/5/2008)

Averyn Lee (6/9/2019)

People


Judge(s)

Baca, Anna M. (Arizona)

Fields, Kenneth L. (Arizona)

Hall, Phillip L. (Arizona)

Mroz, Rosa (Arizona)

Mundell, Barbara Rodriguez (Arizona)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Robinson, Carolyn J. (Arizona)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Gregory, Mary Jane (Arizona)

Iafrate, Michele Marie (Arizona)

Kephart, David J. (Arizona)

Leonard, James P. (Arizona)

Judge(s)

Baca, Anna M. (Arizona)

Fields, Kenneth L. (Arizona)

Hall, Phillip L. (Arizona)

Mroz, Rosa (Arizona)

Mundell, Barbara Rodriguez (Arizona)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Robinson, Carolyn J. (Arizona)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Gregory, Mary Jane (Arizona)

Iafrate, Michele Marie (Arizona)

Kephart, David J. (Arizona)

Leonard, James P. (Arizona)

Other Attorney(s)

Peterson, Bruce (Arizona)

Expert/Monitor/Master

Briney, Robert (Arizona)

Logan, James Leo (Arizona)

Thomas, Andrew Peyton (Arizona)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

07-156830

Docket (state court)

March 4, 2008

March 4, 2008

Docket

07-156830

Ruling

Nov. 14, 2007

Nov. 14, 2007

Order/Opinion

07-156830

Conference- Court Order Entered

Nov. 27, 2007

Nov. 27, 2007

Transcript

07-156830

Ruling

Dec. 6, 2007

Dec. 6, 2007

Order/Opinion

07-156830

Ruling

Dec. 12, 2007

Dec. 12, 2007

Order/Opinion

07-156830

Ruling

Dec. 14, 2007

Dec. 14, 2007

Order/Opinion

07-156830

Status Conference

Jan. 10, 2008

Jan. 10, 2008

Order/Opinion

07-156830

Status Conference

Jan. 10, 2008

Jan. 10, 2008

Transcript

07-156830

Status Conference; Temporary Orders Affirmed

Feb. 1, 2008

Feb. 1, 2008

Transcript

1 CA-SA 07-0267

Opinion (Court of Appeals)

Arpaio v. Baca

Arizona state appellate court

177 P.3d 312, 2008 WL 486008

Feb. 26, 2008

Feb. 26, 2008

Order/Opinion

Resources

Docket

Last updated Aug. 1, 2022, 3 a.m.

Docket sheet not available via the Clearinghouse.

Case Details

State / Territory: Arizona

Case Type(s):

Jail Conditions

Key Dates

Filing Date: Sept. 5, 2007

Closing Date: June 3, 2008

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Arizona criminal defendants challenged the Maricopa County Sheriff's new privileged visitation schedule as denying them access to counsel.

Plaintiff Type(s):

State Plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

Maricopa County Sheriff, County

Case Details

Causes of Action:

State law

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Defendant

Nature of Relief:

Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement

Declaratory Judgment

Source of Relief:

Litigation

Order Duration: 2007 - None

Issues

General:

Access to lawyers or judicial system

Visiting

Affected Gender:

Female

Male

Type of Facility:

Government-run