Jodi Arias Legal Question and Answer Thread *no discussion*

[LILLER]

The defense filed a motion to have Mondays hearing delayed.
Judge Stephens granted it and rescheduled it for Oct. 4
Is the Defense doing this to drag it into next year as they wanted and how many delays can they do?
Is it endless?
I am starting to think the penalty phase will be next year.
Being that said, I am not sure the trial needs a change of venue.

http://www.hlntv.com/article/2013/09/13/arias-back-court-monday-crucial-hearing

 

[Cracka*Jaxx]

Is the Defense doing this to drag it into next year as they wanted and how many delays can they do? Is it endless?

respectfully snipped

I was just wondering the same thing. How many Motions can the DT file? Since it's taxpayer money, and it's clearly a game for JA, she really has nothing to lose at this point. Will the Judge put a stop to this nonsense, or will JA be allowed to bankrupt the State?

And isn't it true that until sentencing is imposed, she will be staying in jail rather than prison?

 

[liltiki]

Hi, first time poster here!


I was re-watching the trial and I came to the part on cross where Juan introduced the Star and photography magazine into evidence (the magazines where Jodi wrote to Matt in code to have sneaked out of the jail). Would the defense have already known about this, would all this legally have to already been disclosed to the defense. Nurmi and Willmott seemed agitated and didn't know what they were looking for when Juan passed them the magazine he wanted entered into evidence.

It was a surreal Perry Mason moment. It looked like the defense and Jodi were sideswiped. Legally, can the prosecution enter into evidence that the defense never saw before?

Thanks

 

[AZlawyer]

The defense filed a motion to have Mondays hearing delayed.
Judge Stephens granted it and rescheduled it for Oct. 4
Is the Defense doing this to drag it into next year as they wanted and how many delays can they do?
Is it endless?
I am starting to think the penalty phase will be next year.
Being that said, I am not sure the trial needs a change of venue.

http://www.hlntv.com/article/2013/09/13/arias-back-court-monday-crucial-hearing

We can speculate about motives, but really this is nothing unusual. I do think, at this point, that we're likely looking at January-ish for the penalty phase retrial.

respectfully snipped

I was just wondering the same thing. How many Motions can the DT file? Since it's taxpayer money, and it's clearly a game for JA, she really has nothing to lose at this point. Will the Judge put a stop to this nonsense, or will JA be allowed to bankrupt the State?

And isn't it true that until sentencing is imposed, she will be staying in jail rather than prison?

Again, this wouldn't be seen as "nonsense" by most people involved. Hearings get delayed all the time. And I haven't seen the motion, so there might be some kind of decent argument for delay.

Yes, she will be in jail until a sentence is imposed.

Hi, first time poster here!


I was re-watching the trial and I came to the part on cross where Juan introduced the Star and photography magazine into evidence (the magazines where Jodi wrote to Matt in code to have sneaked out of the jail). Would the defense have already known about this, would all this legally have to already been disclosed to the defense. Nurmi and Willmott seemed agitated and didn't know what they were looking for when Juan passed them the magazine he wanted entered into evidence.

It was a surreal Perry Mason moment. It looked like the defense and Jodi were sideswiped. Legally, can the prosecution enter into evidence that the defense never saw before?

Thanks

The defense definitely would have seen the magazines, but Juan would not have been obligated to tell them, "Look closely in the inside margins for coded notes in pencil."

 

[gcharlie]

The court calendar for Judge Stevens shows an Evidentiary Hearing for CMJA on 9/27 at 14:30. This information is not displayed on the summary for high profile cases; instead this summary lists 10/4 at 8:30 for a case event of Motions/Status Conference.

Given the information above, I have a few questions:

I'm curious why this evidentiary hearing is not listed as a case event and whether or not this hearing will be a closed hearing. It is scheduled for a Friday, if that makes any difference.

What would be the purpose of an evidentiary hearing while preparing to retry the penalty phase? Are opposing counsel negotiating the summation of the guilt and aggravation phases? Is it likely that counsel is seeking to introduce new evidence or prohibit old evidence from being entered in the retrial?

It has been very educational to follow the case, including the legal proceedings and rulings. I thank you very much for helping laypeople to gain a better understanding of trial procedure and the legal process.

:gthanks:

 

[gcharlie]

Is it routine for the judge to schedule a settlement conference prior to trial?

On the case calendar for CMJA, there is a settlement conference set for 10/24 at 10:00. There is no minute entry regarding this on the calendar, but there was a minute entry back in June 2011 prior to the July conference.

Does this mean that there is a possible plea in the works, or is this just routine to see if the opposing sides can reach a settlement?

 

[franquerolane]

Will she be on 23 hour lockdown till trial? I sure hope so.

 

[AZlawyer]

The court calendar for Judge Stevens shows an Evidentiary Hearing for CMJA on 9/27 at 14:30. This information is not displayed on the summary for high profile cases; instead this summary lists 10/4 at 8:30 for a case event of Motions/Status Conference.

Given the information above, I have a few questions:

I'm curious why this evidentiary hearing is not listed as a case event and whether or not this hearing will be a closed hearing. It is scheduled for a Friday, if that makes any difference.

What would be the purpose of an evidentiary hearing while preparing to retry the penalty phase? Are opposing counsel negotiating the summation of the guilt and aggravation phases? Is it likely that counsel is seeking to introduce new evidence or prohibit old evidence from being entered in the retrial?

It has been very educational to follow the case, including the legal proceedings and rulings. I thank you very much for helping laypeople to gain a better understanding of trial procedure and the legal process.

:gthanks:

The online case docket shows both of those dates.

The first thing we have to remember is that (IMO) about 10% of the stuff on the Maricopa County Superior Court docket website is wrong. So maybe there's going to be a hearing and maybe not.

The summary for high profile cases is just done by the media people--their summary is pretty meaningless. It certainly isn't intended to be comprehensive.

There are about a million reasons there might be an evidentiary hearing before trial. Any motion that is filed that alleges any facts at all might require an evidentiary hearing, unless the other side agrees with those facts. Since we haven't seen the motions, we don't know what facts might have been alleged. But you can look at all the names of the motions that have been filed and try to guess.

Is it routine for the judge to schedule a settlement conference prior to trial?

On the case calendar for CMJA, there is a settlement conference set for 10/24 at 10:00. There is no minute entry regarding this on the calendar, but there was a minute entry back in June 2011 prior to the July conference.

Does this mean that there is a possible plea in the works, or is this just routine to see if the opposing sides can reach a settlement?

Totally routine.

Will she be on 23 hour lockdown till trial? I sure hope so.

That's entirely up to the Sheriff's Office.

 

[Zuri]

Thank you so much dearest AZlawyer. You have been really wonderful in answering all our questions for almost a year.

 

[neesaki]

So now there's a report of a "settlement conference" . What does this mean, AZ? TIA.

 

[gcharlie]

Does the defense motion to change venue effectively preclude the judge from setting a trial date until there has been a ruling on the motion?

When the mistrial was declared, Judge Stephens scheduled July 18 as the trial date. In July, there was still concern over the availability of transcripts, so while no date was set, Judge Stephens did indicate a preference for the trial to start in late September. A flurry of motions were filed , including the motion for change of venue. While the calendar does reflect upcoming activity, there is still no trial date.

 

[AZlawyer]

So now there's a report of a "settlement conference" . What does this mean, AZ? TIA.

It just means that another judge (or a judge pro tem--meaning an attorney who has been approved to handle these conferences) will meet with both sides and see if they can agree on a resolution--e.g., dropping the death penalty.

Does the defense motion to change venue effectively preclude the judge from setting a trial date until there has been a ruling on the motion?

When the mistrial was declared, Judge Stephens scheduled July 18 as the trial date. In July, there was still concern over the availability of transcripts, so while no date was set, Judge Stephens did indicate a preference for the trial to start in late September. A flurry of motions were filed , including the motion for change of venue. While the calendar does reflect upcoming activity, there is still no trial date.

No, she can set a trial date even while that motion is pending. But there are quite a few motions pending, and she may need to hold evidentiary hearings for one or more of them, so there may be no point in trying to set a final date until the preliminary issues are dealt with.

Also, maybe she thinks the prosecution will drop the death penalty at the settlement conference and save her the trouble....

 

[gcharlie]

Could and should Judge Stephens issue a gag order to stop the convicted murdered from using social media?

CMJA, through her minions, is back to actively tweeting again and has even posted a blog this past weekend.

Does it help or hurt either the prosecution or the defense for her to continue this? If so, how so? Can any of this be used in a court of law?

 

[AZlawyer]

Could and should Judge Stephens issue a gag order to stop the convicted murdered from using social media?

CMJA, through her minions, is back to actively tweeting again and has even posted a blog this past weekend.

Does it help or hurt either the prosecution or the defense for her to continue this? If so, how so? Can any of this be used in a court of law?

IMO she can't and shouldn't do that. 1st Amendment and all that.

But of course the prosecution could use anything she says against her (if relevant).

 

[neesaki]

IMO she can't and shouldn't do that. 1st Amendment and all that.

But of course the prosecution could use anything she says against her (if relevant).

So a convicted felon, murderer, still has first amendment rights? I guess I had always believed they lost pretty much all their rights other than to an attorney to defend them, at least while incarcerated. Even afterwards, they can't vote, possess firearms, at least for a certain number of years. Or has that changed too ? They have the same rights in prison as out? Other than being confined? Confusing, where do they draw the line then? :dunno:

 

[Augustgurl]

So a convicted felon, murderer, still has first amendment rights? I guess I had always believed they lost pretty much all their rights other than to an attorney to defend them, at least while incarcerated. Even afterwards, they can't vote, possess firearms, at least for a certain number of years. Or has that changed too ? They have the same rights in prison as out? Other than being confined? Confusing, where do they draw the line then? :dunno:

AZ lawyer, how is it that the defense attorneys are so concerned about the potential jury's twittering when their own client is tainting the jury pool?? Maybe the prosecution should start tweeting. I don't get it. The purpose of a gag is so the potential jurors aren't tainted no? So why is it that the defendant isn't gagged? I would only hope then, if this goes back on appeal with defendant claiming she didnt get a fair trial because of media tainting the jury blah blah blah that this tweeting of her own comes back to bite her. Do you think it would AZ lawyer?

 

[AZlawyer]

So a convicted felon, murderer, still has first amendment rights? I guess I had always believed they lost pretty much all their rights other than to an attorney to defend them, at least while incarcerated. Even afterwards, they can't vote, possess firearms, at least for a certain number of years. Or has that changed too ? They have the same rights in prison as out? Other than being confined? Confusing, where do they draw the line then? :dunno:

Yes, convicts keep many of their rights. Rights that are lost vary from state to state (except the firearm thing--I think that's federal), but normally felons lose the right to vote and to serve on a jury. Now, of course, their 1st Amendment rights can be regulated to some extent for legitimate law enforcement purposes, but it's important that prisoners have the right to communicate with the outside world in order to help keep the powers of the government in check.

AZ lawyer, how is it that the defense attorneys are so concerned about the potential jury's twittering when their own client is tainting the jury pool?? Maybe the prosecution should start tweeting. I don't get it. The purpose of a gag is so the potential jurors aren't tainted no? So why is it that the defendant isn't gagged? I would only hope then, if this goes back on appeal with defendant claiming she didnt get a fair trial because of media tainting the jury blah blah blah that this tweeting of her own comes back to bite her. Do you think it would AZ lawyer?

Jurors tweeting would be much worse than the defendant tweeting, of course, because the defendant is allowed to take sides. There is no gag order that I'm aware of. A gag order on a criminal defendant would be a big 1st Amendment problem, although I haven't researched the case law on that to see if there are any circumstances where it would be OK.

Jodi's tweeting might be brought up again in court, but I'm sure the defense will say that they had to release information to humanize her, in order to counter the bad information that was already "out there" on the Internet.

 

[gcharlie]

Today there is a hearing scheduled for oral arguments. The docket also reflects a request for extension made on October 7, yet there have been no minutes posted since 10/1. How does the court handle requests?

10/7/2013 RET - Request For Extension Of Time - Party (001) 10/7/2013
NOTE: DEFENDANT'S REQUEST FOR EXTENSION AND TO THAT ALL FUTURE PLEADINGS REMAIN UNDER SEAL PRIOR TO RULING

 

[AZlawyer]

Today there is a hearing scheduled for oral arguments. The docket also reflects a request for extension made on October 7, yet there have been no minutes posted since 10/1. How does the court handle requests?

10/7/2013 RET - Request For Extension Of Time - Party (001) 10/7/2013
NOTE: DEFENDANT'S REQUEST FOR EXTENSION AND TO THAT ALL FUTURE PLEADINGS REMAIN UNDER SEAL PRIOR TO RULING

It's just a motion--the other side can object, and ultimately the judge will rule. But I have no idea what the extension request concerns.

 

[gcharlie]

CMJA has written a 12 page Motion to Withdraw Counsel and in it she says that she made a previous motion to withdraw counsel in June 2013.

The court docket does not reflect any written motion. She was in court on June 20, so an oral motion could have been made, however there are no minutes on the docket recording a denial of said motion.

If a motion was made and denied, as she claims, wouldn't the minutes have to be recorded?