395 P.3d 1111
Ariz. Ct. App.2017Background
- Supreme Court issued Simpson v. Miller (Simpson II) on Feb. 9, 2017, addressing bail for sexual offenses and requiring an individualized dangerousness finding in certain sexual-conduct-with-minor cases.
- Maricopa County issued a protocol interpreting Simpson II to require full adversary A.R.S. § 13-3961(D) hearings to deny bail in sexual-assault and related cases.
- Goodman and Henderson were charged with sexual assault (A.R.S. § 13-1406) and faced superior-court evidentiary hearings under the county protocol.
- Superior court found proof evident and presumption great for both defendants but concluded the state did not prove by clear and convincing evidence ongoing dangerousness; both were granted secured bonds.
- State sought special-action relief, arguing trial courts misapplied Simpson II by holding individualized dangerousness hearings for sexual-assault charges; the appellate court accepted jurisdiction because the issue was statewide and recurring.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Simpson II requires an individualized dangerousness hearing before denying bail to defendants charged with sexual assault | State: No — sexual assault is inherently non-bailable when proof is evident or presumption great; no § 13‑3961(D) hearing required | Real parties: Simpson II requires individualized dangerousness findings for each defendant before denying bail | Held: Sexual assault remains non-bailable when proof is evident or presumption great; no § 13‑3961(D) hearing is required because lack of consent makes the offense inherently dangerous |
| Whether special-action jurisdiction was appropriate to resolve the dispute statewide | State: Special action appropriate due to lack of adequate remedy and statewide importance | Real parties: (implicit) relief should be decided in individual cases on appeal | Held: Special action accepted — issue is of statewide importance, likely to recur, and not adequately addressed by appeal |
Key Cases Cited
- Simpson v. Miller, 241 Ariz. 341, 387 P.3d 1270 (2017) (held individualized dangerousness findings required for sexual‑conduct‑with‑minor cases in some circumstances)
- Segura v. Cunanan, 219 Ariz. 228, 196 P.3d 831 (2008) (historical context on bail and nonbailable offenses)
- Wiley v. State, 18 Ariz. 239, 158 P. 135 (1916) (early discussion of constitutional bail exceptions)
- Lind v. Superior Court, 191 Ariz. 233, 954 P.2d 1058 (1998) (special‑action jurisdiction factors for statewide issues)
- State v. Sullivan, 205 Ariz. 285, 69 P.3d 1006 (2003) (principle that appellate courts are bound by Supreme Court precedent)