Retrial for Sentencing of Jodi Arias - 1/15 thru 1/20 Break

[AZlawyer]

AZL, how does it work at the appellate level for the DT now? Now we're into more of the traditional appeal situation vs special actions. Say KN and JW want to take these 17 smackdowns and write up for each one how they think the judge was off her rocker and they should overrule her. How does it work?
- Do they file 17 different appeals? Do they file 1 with everything? Or do they pick a few that they think they have the best shot at?
- Does each appeal consist of only some relatively small amount of paperwork and copies of transcripts and exhibits?
- Do they also need to cite relevant settled case law to back their argument up?
- Ignoring stays, can the COA just refuse to hear the appeal, letting the lower court ruling stand, or do they have to issue more than that in each case?
- If there are to be oral arguments, I presume they have to be short and to the point, like the earlier ones. (Those were all short, but not necessarily all to the point haha.)
- What is the COA's take going in? Is their attitude along the lines of "We've got what you sent and we've read the judge's decision. You have 15 minutes to convince us that her logic was flawed."

Thanks - you can see what I'm getting at. It seems like the same sorts of things that a trial like this encourages from the defense: obfuscation, inept/lying witnesses, arguments all over the map/contradictory, time-wasting, interrupting the other party endlessly, etc. all are exactly the wrong approach to use on appeal. I suppose that's why there are people like you who specialize in appeals - you don't have to change gears for appeals since you operate in the right gear already. It might be a struggle for you to handle a normal case in a regular court for similar reasons - it's just a different way of operating.

The time to appeal has not started yet. They can file a special action if they want--one, because there was one order that they would be challenging. IMO there is a 99.999% chance of denial at this stage. These issues will be decided on appeal after sentencing. Everything will be filed in one appeal except the ineffective assistance of counsel argument (inevitable), which is decided through a separate procedure called "post-conviction relief."

If there is a death sentence, far more issues will be taken up on appeal than if there is a life sentence. Also, if there's a death sentence, it will go straight to the AZ Supreme Court and the assigned judge's law clerks will go through literally everything looking for any serious appeal issue that was missed. (I know because I did it for a year lol. And found ONE big missed issue in ONE case.)

Appellate briefs are normally fairly short in AZ (like 20-30 pages--I know, I know, you're like, SHORT?) but in a case like this will likely be longer. The entire record will be transmitted to the appellate court electronically, but they will only look at everything if, as I mentioned above, it's a DP case. Yes, case law/statutes must be cited, and specific references to the record (transcripts, exhibits) must be included. None of this "the prosecutor badgers the witnesses"--you have to cite page and line numbers in the transcript.

Whichever court gets the appeal (depending on whether it's a death case) has to take it. (This is not the case with a special action FYI.) Technically, the court can just say "affirmed," but in a serious criminal case they won't do that.

Oral arguments will likely be 30 minutes per side.

I don't think the Ct App or AZ Supreme Court would waste much time worrying about the particular decision that was issued today. It was a pretty easy call to be honest, once you got past the sheer volume of accusations.

I do jury (and non-jury) trials as well, but I do prefer appellate courts because (1) the judges are super-smart and (2) juries are unpredictable.

 

[LinasK]

I am so glad Travis's family can take this break knowing their brother has been vindicated of the accusations of *advertiser censored*.

A week off for them and a week of solitary for Jodi!!! Must suck to be her about now.

 

[LinasK]

AZL, how does it work at the appellate level for the DT now? Now we're into more of the traditional appeal situation vs special actions. Say KN and JW want to take these 17 smackdowns and write up for each one how they think the judge was off her rocker and they should overrule her. How does it work?
- Do they file 17 different appeals? Do they file 1 with everything? Or do they pick a few that they think they have the best shot at?
- Does each appeal consist of only some relatively small amount of paperwork and copies of transcripts and exhibits?
- Do they also need to cite relevant settled case law to back their argument up?
- Ignoring stays, can the COA just refuse to hear the appeal, letting the lower court ruling stand, or do they have to issue more than that in each case?
- If there are to be oral arguments, I presume they have to be short and to the point, like the earlier ones. (Those were all short, but not necessarily all to the point haha.)
- What is the COA's take going in? Is their attitude along the lines of "We've got what you sent and we've read the judge's decision. You have 15 minutes to convince us that her logic was flawed."

Thanks - you can see what I'm getting at. It seems like the same sorts of things that a trial like this encourages from the defense: obfuscation, inept/lying witnesses, arguments all over the map/contradictory, time-wasting, interrupting the other party endlessly, etc. all are exactly the wrong approach to use on appeal. I suppose that's why there are people like you who specialize in appeals - you don't have to change gears for appeals since you operate in the right gear already. It might be a struggle for you to handle a normal case in a regular court for similar reasons - it's just a different way of operating.

Most of their arguments were petty, there's no way they'll get overturned. Arguing about Juan giving an autograph, and Mrs. Flores on Facebook??? Come on now!:doh:

 

[AZlawyer]

I’m elated that all the DT’s motions were denied but I’m also upset about part of the court’s rulings. Specifically, the two State motions which this judge denied with NO explanation. I want to know WHY she denied them. IIRC, these motions were in reference to the BN’s failure to give Juan a copy of the disc he worked on. BN’s testiphony was based on this disc and the magical appearance of the incinerator which was not even in existence at that time. I want to know who installed the incinerator and who was behind this. After failing several times to provide a copy of the disc, Juan filed a motion for sanctions. Why was the motion denied????

:seeya:

BBM: With the excessive number of motions filed by the DT, the 2 Motions filed by Juan and JSS's decision on these Motions have been forgotten and lost in the shuffle.

So glad you brought this up because I forgot about it... so hopefully, there will be an answer as to WHY Juan's motions were denied!

Because BN incinerated his own damn copy, so who cares?

From the previous thread:

Originally Posted by AZlawyer


With all due respect, what has style and form got to do with it? She's a really, really bad manager and she has prolonged this case, IMO, in a way that did not have to happen; there have been consequences and that's the most important issue. And if that is just style and form speaking then it makes the law courts look insane. There is nothing timely about this trial and Travis' kin are suffering for it. She is weak in controllng the courtroom and lame when it comes to decisions. Sure, she came charging out of the gate now, but at what cost?

She dismissed the motions to remove the DP? Well, why shouldn't she? It doesn't make her exceptional in my books. In fact, it makes her tardy. At the same time, her word has proven to be not reliable.

I am not going to applaud her for finally getting to a place she should have gotten to a while ago, not to mention the crap she has left in her wake.

I see what you're saying. Style and form can certainly be important, and I think Travis's family has indeed suffered based on the mishandling of the "non-substantive" issues. I'm not saying those rulings didn't have an effect, just that they were not about the charges, the sentence, the verdict, etc.

 

[NashBridges2]

Let's talk about the jury questions.

Anyone else feel like we have our very own data scientist on the jury? I'm sure most of the computer/*advertiser censored* evidence will be dismissed by the jury. I know myself, I didn't understand any of the testimony well enough to use it to render any help so I'd dismiss it all.

 

[Val1]

We need some fireworks to start off this thread to celebrate Judge Stephens ruling to dismiss the DP and smackdown the defense::fireworks::fireworks::fireworks::smiliescale::justice::jumping::jumping::jumping::skip::skip::skip::happydance:

I'd settle for the look on BN's face right about now, after that public display in the courtroom(big grin trotting up to JA and shaking her hand after his testiphony). Is there any recourse for JM? I know he's a big boy and all that, but displays like that should never have been allowed, heck even ChaCha tried not to be so obvious when she was slipping notes or whatever it was to JA's mom during the trial.

 

[elementary]

A week off for them and a week of solitary for Jodi!!! Must suck to be her about now.

She's not really in solitary, is she? I imagine she will be 'hosting' all sorts of people, as is her wont.

 

[Madeleine74]

Never say never :0) but I agree it's pretty unlikely. What her life at Perryville will be like depends on whether she gets the DP or LWP and that's a big issue to me.

Two females ahead of her on DR...there for much longer (decade or 2) and still alive. She'll not be executed.

 

[Madeleine74]

She's not really in solitary, is she? I imagine she will be 'hosting' all sorts of people, as is her wont.

I think the fantasy of what life is like in jail is just that.

 

[Steely Dan]

Can Juan file a motion to determine whether or not JA's mitigation specialist is in fact cougarlicious? Because I have a feeling that a real cougar would pass on eating her. JMO uke:

 

[MeeBee]

Two females ahead of her on DR...there for much longer (decade or 2) and still alive. She'll not be executed.

I still think there's a possibility. She's still young yet. She could be 60-70 years old before they finally pull the switch. Appeals don't last forever.

 

[MeeBee]

She's not really in solitary, is she? I imagine she will be 'hosting' all sorts of people, as is her wont.

As far as we know she is still in solitary.

 

[bsk]

Most of their arguments were petty, there's no way they'll get overturned. Arguing about Juan giving an autograph, and Mrs. Flores on Facebook??? Come on now!:doh:

I agree they were mostly a bunch of carp. JA/MDLR had some art confiscated. Oh boo hoo. Juan signed an autograph. Earth-shattering. etc.

I was just wondering how the procedure worked.

 

[MeeBee]

Also the two women ahead of her have not actually been on DR for that long relatively speaking.

 

[ZoeyW]

I noticed in the latest transcripts that JM often said, "Leading" and JSS answered, "Overruled" with an occasional "Sustained" thrown in. Why can't most objections be quickly handled this way, rather than the nonstop, prolonged "proaches"? These constant DT interruptions of the prosecution, this time and last, is what I fault JSS for most, not her motion responses.

Here is the reason out of the law library

Many states have rules and statutes that provide that an objection made in court must be made specifically and concisely rather than in an argumentative or suggestive manner. Objections made in violation of these rules are known as "speaking objections". These objections proceed beyond what is necessary to give the grounds on which the objection is based. This is often done by the attorney in order to coach a witness to say a particular thing.

An objection that is made in such a manner is often improper.

________________________________ Jen/Nurmi have a horrible habit of trying to coach the witnesses with her speaking objections. I recall ALV, Samuels and Jodi not being very bright, as soon as the judge would over rule the objection, they would re state verbatim what Nurmi or Jen just tried to argue in their objection. They may as well have looked over at them and winked, for approval. It was THAT overt.

 

[NashBridges2]

Can Juan file a motion to determine whether or not JA's mitigation specialist is in fact cougarlicious? Because I have a feeling that a real cougar would pass on eating her. JMO uke:

I might have just choked on a gummi bear

 

[LinasK]

I agree they were mostly a bunch of carp. JA/MDLR had some art confiscated. Oh boo hoo. Juan signed an autograph. Earth-shattering. etc.

I was just wondering how the procedure worked.

Oh, and her cell was tossed.:violin::violin::violin:

 

[bsk]

Who is scheduled for Tuesday, Neumeister or Geffmeister? Is there even anything for BN to testify about any more? He got lost once pinned down and punted to Sue. BN's hundreds and hundreds of *advertiser censored* links has been reduced by his co-worker to one. I thought it was Geff who was due back on the 20th.

 

[Steely Dan]

Let's talk about the jury questions.

Anyone else feel like we have our very own data scientist on the jury? I'm sure most of the computer/*advertiser censored* evidence will be dismissed by the jury. I know myself, I didn't understand any of the testimony well enough to use it to render any help so I'd dismiss it all.

I'd be asking what the hades this has to do with the trial. :waitasec:

I'd settle for the look on BN's face right about now, after that public display in the courtroom(big grin trotting up to JA and shaking her hand after his testiphony). Is there any recourse for JM? I know he's a big boy and all that, but displays like that should never have been allowed, heck even ChaCha tried not to be so obvious when she was slipping notes or whatever it was to JA's mom during the trial.

Did Sue shake Jodi's hand in front of the jury after is testiphony?

I still think there's a possibility. She's still young yet. She could be 60-70 years old before they finally pull the switch. Appeals don't last forever.

For me it's having her put in solitary, never knowing when the axe will fall.

 

[geevee]

I’m elated that all the DT’s motions were denied but I’m also upset about part of the court’s rulings. Specifically, the two State motions which this judge denied with NO explanation. I want to know WHY she denied them. IIRC, these motions were in reference to the BN’s failure to give Juan a copy of the disc he worked on. BN’s testiphony was based on this disc and the magical appearance of the incinerator which was not even in existence at that time. I want to know who installed the incinerator and who was behind this. After failing several times to provide a copy of the disc, Juan filed a motion for sanctions. Why was the motion denied????

Once the verdict is in and JA is sentenced, hopefully JSS will unseal everything, we'll likely have most of our questions answered when that happens. probably be a really big doc dump but it should be quite enlightening.