State v. Lee
226 Ariz. 234
| Ariz. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Civil forfeiture action against Franklins; victims identified in criminal case; depositions sought of victims in the civil case; victims asserted right to refuse deposition under VBR; state sought protective orders to preclude depositions; court denied, state filed special action; issue is whether VBR protects victims from civil deposition.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does the Victims' Bill of Rights apply to civil proceedings? | State: VBR right to refuse applies in any venue during criminal process; extends to civil depositions. | Franklins: VBR applies only to criminal proceedings; civil depositions are outside scope. | Yes, VBR applies to civil deposition of victims in this context. |
| Does the State have standing to bring the special action on behalf of victims? | State: victims affirmatively requested protection; Rule 2(a)(2) grants standing. | Franklins: no victim request, no standing. | State has standing to seek relief on victims' behalf. |
| Was the timing of filing the petition proper given delay? | State: timing reasonable due to ongoing motions and scheduling changes. | Franklins: laches; petition should be barred. | Timing reasonable; laches not shown to bar relief. |
| What is the scope of the right to refuse a deposition under the VBR? | Right to refuse extends to depositions regarding the offense against the victim, even in parallel civil actions. | Right to refuse is limited to criminal proceedings; civil context not covered. | Right to refuse applies to civil deposition when subject is the offense against the victim. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Stauffer, 203 Ariz. 551 (App. 2002) (victim's right to refuse interview is inviolate across related offenses)
- State ex rel. Romley v. Hutt, 195 Ariz. 256 (App. 1999) (victim's right to decline interview absolute in appropriate context)
- Champlin v. Sargeant, 192 Ariz. 371 (1998) (limits on victim interviews; later legislative changes)
- State v. Warner, 168 Ariz. 261 (App. 1990) (special action jurisdiction for victims' rights enforcement)
- Knapp v. Martone, 170 Ariz. 237 (1992) (principle of plain-language interpretation in constitutional analysis)