State v. Lieder, 1 CA-CR 15-0603

In June 2014 a motorcycle was reported stolen from homeowners; officers located the motorcycle at appellant Christopher Lieder’s last reported address and the homeowners identified it.
Lieder was charged with third-degree burglary and theft of means of transportation and elected to testify that he had his mother’s permission to take the motorcycle.
The State moved to add two 2005 convictions (forgery and theft) as aggravating allegations and sought to use them to impeach Lieder; Lieder moved to exclude them under Ariz. R. Evid. 609 as too remote and unduly prejudicial.
The trial court found Lieder’s credibility central because his defense depended on his testimony about permission, concluded the impeaching convictions (released March 2005) were only four months past the Rule 609(b) ten-year cutoff, and ruled their probative value outweighed prejudice, but sanitized how their nature would be presented to the jury.
Lieder admitted the prior felonies on cross-examination, was convicted on both counts, sentenced to concurrent mitigated prison terms, and appealed the admission of the prior convictions.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court abused its discretion under Ariz. R. Evid. 609(b) by admitting two convictions more than ten years old to impeach defendant	State: The convictions’ probative value substantially outweighs prejudice because defendant’s credibility was central to the defense and the prior crimes were theft-related and only four months beyond ten years	Lieder: The convictions are too remote (over 10 years) and their prejudicial effect outweighs any impeachment value	Court affirmed: no abuse of discretion; court considered relevant Green factors, found high impeachment value and similarity of offenses, limited prejudice by sanitizing details

State v. Beasley, 205 Ariz. 334 (trial court best positioned to balance probative value vs. prejudice)
State v. Doty, 232 Ariz. 502 (trial court’s balancing role in admitting evidence)
State v. Wassenaar, 215 Ariz. 565 (abuse of discretion standard)
State v. Green, 200 Ariz. 496 (factors for admitting convictions older than ten years under Rule 609(b))
State v. Noble, 126 Ariz. 41 (applying Rule 609(b) when more than ten years have passed)