Jodi Arias Legal Question and Answer Thread *no discussion*

[AZlawyer]

Okay, so I just read a motion filed by the defense for the trial to be continued (which apparently means it will not be continued) until January 2014.
With the - however faint - prospect of JA spending several more months (or even years, who knows) in jail, waiting to be sentenced, another question arose: Will the time and condition under which she is currently held influence the time and conditions in prison after her sentencing?
To clarify: When she is sentenced to life, she will, according to my knowledge, spend a certain amount of time in maximum security, which then can be reduced down to close custody and medium security. If she is already held in similar to max condition by Sheriff Joe right now (I heard something like 23 hour lockdown), can this reduce the time (later in prison) she has to wait until she gets better conditions? Or will the time until she is eligible for reduced security only start in prison?

Many thanks in advance!

I don't think the prison cares how long you were in jail. If it takes a few years to be eligible for close custody, the time will start when she gets to prison.

If on 6/20 Juan Martinez stands up & requests that the death penalty request be withdrawn, will Judge Stephens then immediately sentence Arias or what could occur?

I believe AZlawyer answered this previously, saying the judge would schedule a final court date to announce the sentence. This so the families can be in court to hear the decision.

JSS might also offer the parties the chance to present additional evidence to help her decide life vs. natural life. I don't think this is required, but she might make the offer.

 

[AuburnSchnauzer]

Some "star" on TV suggested that CMA could end up in a posh mental ward somewhere other than somewhere else.

True or Untrue?

TIA

 

[AZlawyer]

Some "star" on TV suggested that CMA could end up in a posh mental ward somewhere other than somewhere else.

True or Untrue?

TIA

Seems ridiculous to me. She's not insane.

 

[Nhic]

JA is a convicted murderer who will be spending the rest of her life in prison, if she doesn't get the death penalty. Why isn't she spending her time in prison, rather than jail, awaiting her sentencing hearing?

 

[AuburnSchnauzer]

http://www.kpho.com/category/265947/motion-for-delay-in

In the State of Arizona, what are odds that JSS will grant the delay requested in above stated motion while the defense tries to invent some new witnesses?

How do know for a fact that the two witnesses actually received death threats? Wouldn't the court require police reports or ??? Thanks again...

 

[AZlawyer]

JA is a convicted murderer who will be spending the rest of her life in prison, if she doesn't get the death penalty. Why isn't she spending her time in prison, rather than jail, awaiting her sentencing hearing?

Because she hasn't been sentenced to any time in prison yet.

http://www.kpho.com/category/265947/motion-for-delay-in

In the State of Arizona, what are odds that JSS will grant the delay requested in above stated motion while the defense tries to invent some new witnesses?

How do know for a fact that the two witnesses actually received death threats? Wouldn't the court require police reports or ??? Thanks again...

IMO she will not grant a delay for that reason. The defense didn't even attempt to explain what they would do with the additional time, and they will have had plenty of time anyway before the next phase actually starts to "figure out how to paint a picture." I'm sure she will grant a delay based on court conflicts, though.

Also, this "if we can't paint a complete picture we refuse to paint any picture at all" nonsense is the first real evidence I've seen in support of the theory that the defense attorneys were hoping to create an ineffective assistance of counsel issue.

If, at the retrial of the penalty phase, the defense says that the witnesses have been threatened and are unable to testify, JSS will presumably require some evidence in that regard. IMO she requested evidence last time, too, and didn't get it--remember she said it would be "speculation" to assume that Patty didn't show due to threats, and Mr. Nurmi protested her use of the word "speculation"? IMO JSS was using that word to mean "I haven't seen any persuasive evidence in that regard," and Mr. Nurmi was protesting because he felt that he HAD presented good evidence.

 

[cosmos]

It appears Willmott has 5 cases in August if you include the Arias retrial, plus a TBD.

How are priorities determined when there is a scheduling conflict? I assume defendants demanding their right to a speedy trial have to get priority. And I assume cases that are relatively short and simple should get priority to clear them off the calendar. And then along comes Jodi. She's been in jail for 5 years and might be happy to be in jail for 50 years rather than be sentenced to natural life in prison or death. Can the lawyers postpone her trial forever by claiming scheduling conflicts? How does the Arias case ever get elevated priority? Can there be a demand that the defense lawyers have to withdraw from any of their other cases?

 

[AZlawyer]

It appears Willmott has 5 cases in August if you include the Arias retrial, plus a TBD.

How are priorities determined when there is a scheduling conflict? I assume defendants demanding their right to a speedy trial have to get priority. And I assume cases that are relatively short and simple should get priority to clear them off the calendar. And then along comes Jodi. She's been in jail for 5 years and might be happy to be in jail for 50 years rather than be sentenced to natural life in prison or death. Can the lawyers postpone her trial forever by claiming scheduling conflicts? How does the Arias case ever get elevated priority? Can there be a demand that the defense lawyers have to withdraw from any of their other cases?

The scheduling conflicts won't postpone the case for long. Once the JA retrial is set, the defense team will have to tell other judges in other cases that they have a conflict if those other judges try to set things for the same dates.

 

[AuburnSchnauzer]

http://www.azcentral.com/community/...-defense-judge-postpone-retrial--january.html

According to this statement by Montgomery, the re-try in the DP penalty phase will go forward. Do we have to wait until June 20 to hear the Judge's decision on the motion by the defense to wait until January or might the Judge decide before then?

 

[AuburnSchnauzer]

The scheduling conflicts won't postpone the case for long. Once the JA retrial is set, the defense team will have to tell other judges in other cases that they have a conflict if those other judges try to set things for the same dates.

Oh. That's interesting. I would have thought that JSS would have gone to the other judges in those other cases that they are just going to have to wait. Legally, I am not allowed to have discussion here so I will ask a pertinent question. When did the defense atty's accept these other cases and were they told ahead of time by the Judge that they were to allot their time to this case?

 

[AZlawyer]

http://www.azcentral.com/community/...-defense-judge-postpone-retrial--january.html

According to this statement by Montgomery, the re-try in the DP penalty phase will go forward. Do we have to wait until June 20 to hear the Judge's decision on the motion by the defense to wait until January or might the Judge decide before then?

I doubt she will even decide on June 20, unless JM says he doesn't need to submit a response brief and is willing to just argue the issue at the hearing.

Oh. That's interesting. I would have thought that JSS would have gone to the other judges in those other cases that they are just going to have to wait. Legally, I am not allowed to have discussion here so I will ask a pertinent question. When did the defense atty's accept these other cases and were they told ahead of time by the Judge that they were to allot their time to this case?

There was no reason not to accept other cases. And they are not required to spend all their time on the JA case. It has certainly taken up most of their time during trial, of course.

 

[AuburnSchnauzer]

I doubt she will even decide on June 20, unless JM says he doesn't need to submit a response brief and is willing to just argue the issue at the hearing.



There was no reason not to accept other cases. And they are not required to spend all their time on the JA case. It has certainly taken up most of their time during trial, of course.

Thank You.

 

[magnolia]

http://www.azcentral.com/community/...-defense-judge-postpone-retrial--january.html

According to this statement by Montgomery, the re-try in the DP penalty phase will go forward. Do we have to wait until June 20 to hear the Judge's decision on the motion by the defense to wait until January or might the Judge decide before then?

BBM--Montgomery has not made a definitive decision.

Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery on Wednesday said that he had not made a definitive decision of whether he will continue to seek death or if he will try to resolve the case by other means. He needs only to withdraw the intent to seek the death penalty for Arias to be sentenced to life in prison. But Montogmery said his office will continue preparing for retrial until the final decision is made. A status hearing in the case is slated for June 20.

http://www.azcentral.com/community/...-defense-judge-postpone-retrial--january.html

 

[Jay]

Oh. That's interesting. I would have thought that JSS would have gone to the other judges in those other cases that they are just going to have to wait. Legally, I am not allowed to have discussion here so I will ask a pertinent question. When did the defense atty's accept these other cases and were they told ahead of time by the Judge that they were to allot their time to this case?

Some of JW's cases have already been delayed, possibly because of the overly long Arias trial. And JW is representing clients in cases of import - including child molestation, and a heavyweight gang/drug case where she's representing one of four or five defendants. She's also the lawyer of a woman who has been the focus of some media attention, a mother high on pot who left her baby in a safety seat on the roof of her car, and drove off. Luckily the baby wasn't hurt when she fell onto the road, and was rescued by a bystander.

 

[AuburnSchnauzer]

BBM--Montgomery has not made a definitive decision.

War Eagle.

 

[neesaki]

Because she hasn't been sentenced to any time in prison yet.



IMO she will not grant a delay for that reason. The defense didn't even attempt to explain what they would do with the additional time, and they will have had plenty of time anyway before the next phase actually starts to "figure out how to paint a picture." I'm sure she will grant a delay based on court conflicts, though.

Also, this "if we can't paint a complete picture we refuse to paint any picture at all" nonsense is the first real evidence I've seen in support of the theory that the defense attorneys were hoping to create an ineffective assistance of counsel issue.

If, at the retrial of the penalty phase, the defense says that the witnesses have been threatened and are unable to testify, JSS will presumably require some evidence in that regard. IMO she requested evidence last time, too, and didn't get it--remember she said it would be "speculation" to assume that Patty didn't show due to threats, and Mr. Nurmi protested her use of the word "speculation"? IMO JSS was using that word to mean "I haven't seen any persuasive evidence in that regard," and Mr. Nurmi was protesting because he felt that he HAD presented good evidence.

As an attorney then, how could Nurmi insist he had provided "evidence", when it was in fact not really evidence? As an educated, seasoned attorney, would he seriously not know the difference? Is it that ambiguous? TIA :seeya:

 

[neesaki]

Some of JW's cases have already been delayed, possibly because of the overly long Arias trial. And JW is representing clients in cases of import - including child molestation, and a heavyweight gang/drug case where she's representing one of four or five defendants. She's also the lawyer of a woman who has been the focus of some media attention, a mother high on pot who left her baby in a safety seat on the roof of her car, and drove off. Luckily the baby wasn't hurt when she fell onto the road, and was rescued by a bystander.

JW is not the only attorney on CMJA's case. What is wrong with Nurmi handling the case, if JW is not available? What good is it for the state to pay for two attorneys rather than one, if one can't stand in for the other? TIA

 

[AZlawyer]

As an attorney then, how could Nurmi insist he had provided "evidence", when it was in fact not really evidence? As an educated, seasoned attorney, would he seriously not know the difference? Is it that ambiguous? TIA :seeya:

I think he provided some evidence, but it wasn't good enough. Whether or not evidence is good enough to prove a point is very often ambiguous, yes.

 

[AZlawyer]

JW is not the only attorney on CMJA's case. What is wrong with Nurmi handling the case, if JW is not available? What good is it for the state to pay for two attorneys rather than one, if one can't stand in for the other? TIA

The point of having two attorneys assigned to every death penalty case is to reduce the likelihood of ineffective assistance of counsel (and thus reduce reversals on appeal).

 

[Jay]

As an attorney then, how could Nurmi insist he had provided "evidence", when it was in fact not really evidence? As an educated, seasoned attorney, would he seriously not know the difference? Is it that ambiguous? TIA :seeya:

How specific does evidence of threat to a witness have to be?
And what about an atmosphere of threat?
Nurmi could have shown the judge hundreds of threatening web postings, directed at both potential mitigation witnesses. With research time, he could produce thousands.
Aren't threats on the Internet as real as anonymous threatening phone calls or letters?