319 P.3d 248
Ariz. Ct. App.2014Background
- Gill was convicted after a jury trial of aggravated DUI and criminal damage to property arising from a December 16, 2010 highway incident where a pickup truck hit a parked boat causing substantial damage; he admitted drinking and driving, and officers observed slurred speech, intoxication and odor of alcohol; Gill’s girlfriend testified the truck belonged to Gill’s deceased friend and Gill kept it at his home; Gill moved for Rule 20 relief arguing corpus delicti was not established and the State lacked independent proof beyond his statements; trial court denied the Rule 20 motion and Gill was sentenced to concurrent terms including restitution; the court later entered a CRO that the appellate court partially vacated; the appellate court affirmed convictions and most of the CRO but vacated portions concerning fees and assessments.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether corpus delicti was established for DUI | Gill argues no independent proof of DUI apart from his statements | State contends independent corroboration exists | Corpus delicti established; no error in ruling against Gill |
| Whether evidence sufficed to prove DUI apart from confession | Gill asserts insufficiency of evidence beyond his statements | State shows independent corroboration via accident context and testimony | Sufficient independent evidence corroborated DUI beyond confession |
| Whether the criminal restitution order was legally defective | Gill challenges improper CRO structure classifying fees and assessments | State contends CRO suspension of interest valid; issue not appealed | Vacate improper CRO components; affirm remaining CRO elements |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Weis, 92 Ariz. 254 (Ariz. 1962) (corpus delicti requires proof of a crime beyond a confession)
- State v. Rubiano, 214 Ariz. 184 (App. 2007) (corpus delicti may be established by corroboration or circumstantial evidence)
- State v. McDougall v. Superior Court, 188 Ariz. 147 (App. 1996) (circumstantial evidence can establish corpus delicti)
- State v. Chappell, 225 Ariz. 229 (2010) (corpus delicti can be established by independent corroboration)
- State v. Butler, 82 Ariz. 25 (1957) (corpus delicti may be shown by circumstantial evidence or corroboration)
- State v. McGann, 132 Ariz. 296 (1963) (hearsay can become competent evidence when not objected to at trial)
- State v. West, 226 Ariz. 559 (2011) (standard of review for Rule 20 motions varies; no abuse of discretion)