What Is The Cost Of Justice? For Some, Just Six Words

What Is The Cost Of Justice? For Some, Just Six Words

Arizona State Law Journal Blog
By Helen Hitz. Opinion: Arizona needs to enact an exception to the felony-murder rule in cases where the individual killed was an accomplice of the individual charged with murder. The addition of just six words to Arizona’s first-degree murder statute would mean justice for many Arizonans. “We ain’t kill Jacob, we watched Jacob die before our eyes, that was our friend.” Fourteen-year-old Johnny Reed was a caretaker for his grandmother who suffered from kidney failure. He was a recent middle school graduate. He loved to bake cookies and cakes for his family with second hand utensils he had thrifted from Goodwill.  Fourteen-year-old Johnny Reed was sentenced to serve fifteen years in prison, more years than he had been alive, for the murder of his friend Jacob Harris. Except Johnny did not kill Jacob; Johnny…
Read More
<em>Smith v. Arizona</em>: Yuma Case Sets the Stage for Long-Awaited Review of the Confrontation Clause

Smith v. Arizona: Yuma Case Sets the Stage for Long-Awaited Review of the Confrontation Clause

Arizona State Law Journal Blog
By Sam Curry. In late September 2023, the Supreme Court granted review in a criminal case originating in Yuma, AZ. The case implicates the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment, which gives criminal defendants the right to cross-examine witnesses who make “testimonial” statements against them. This area of law has often been riddled with uncertainty, but particularly so in the last decade after the Supreme Court’s 2012 decision in Williams v. Illinois. The Confrontation Clause—Where We AreIn 1980, the Supreme Court gave a relatively relaxed interpretation of the Sixth Amendment in Ohio v. Roberts, holding that hearsay statements satisfied the Confrontation Clause so long as they had sufficient indicia of reliability. Twenty-four years later in Crawford v. Washington, the Court gave a much stricter reading: A criminal defendant’s “right to be confronted…
Read More
From Cibola to Queen Creek – Water Transfer Highlights the Growing Rural vs. Urban Dispute over Water

From Cibola to Queen Creek – Water Transfer Highlights the Growing Rural vs. Urban Dispute over Water

Arizona State Law Journal Blog
By McKenna Hunter. The Transfer In 2018, the Town of Queen Creek, AZ was groundwater-dependent; it recognized that its complete reliance on groundwater was insufficient to allow for growth. To diversify the town’s water portfolio, part of the town’s plan included purchasing Colorado River water. As a result, the town approved a purchase from a land-owner in Cibola (GSC farm) to receive 4th priority Colorado River Water. This began a lengthy five-year legal process, culminating in an official transfer of water beginning this past July. As part of the Phoenix Active Management Area (AMA), Queen Creek has to show that any planned development of subdivisions is consistent with the AMA’s goals—to achieve a safe yield by 2025—and plan. Thus, for any growth, the town would need to show that they are not “mining”…
Read More
Arizona Laws Stand in the Way of Stem Cell Research

Arizona Laws Stand in the Way of Stem Cell Research

Arizona State Law Journal Blog
By Victoria Warkins.  Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research Dr. Magdalena Zernicka-Goetz, a biology professor at CalTech and University of Cambridge, introduced her team’s development of the first “synthetic” human embryo in June of this year. Scientists created the synthetic embryo by using human embryonic stem cells. And while the breakthrough could provide incredible insight into the earliest days of pregnancy, it also revived the debate on stem cell research.  Stem cell research is cutting-edge technology important for many areas of medicine. Embryonic stem cells are pluripotent, meaning that they can become any type of stem cell in the human body. Stem cells can help our understanding of how diseases occur, help regenerate damaged tissues, and be used to test new drugs. However, this promising research has not progressed as fast…
Read More
<em>Torres v. Jai Dining Services</em>: A Major Loss for Victims of Drunk Driving in Arizona  

Torres v. Jai Dining Services: A Major Loss for Victims of Drunk Driving in Arizona  

Arizona State Law Journal Blog
By Sarah LeFevre.  Should a restaurant or bar be held liable for negligently selling or overserving alcohol to a patron who then causes injury, death, or property damage due to their intoxication? On October 16, 2023, in Torres v. JAI Dining Services, the Arizona Supreme Court upheld a state law that significantly limits dram shop liability. The Court ultimately overturned a jury verdict that would have awarded the plaintiffs $800,000 in damages from a bar that overserved a patron who then tragically killed two individuals in a drunk driving accident.   Brief History of Arizona’s Dram Shop Liability To successfully bring a negligence claim, a plaintiff must prove duty, breach, causation, and damages. Historically, in Arizona, a plaintiff could not recover from a bar or restaurant for injuries caused by an…
Read More
SB 1291 and Its Negative Impact on People with Severe Mental Illness

SB 1291 and Its Negative Impact on People with Severe Mental Illness

Arizona State Law Journal Blog
By Faith Helgesen.  Earlier this year, the governor of Arizona signed SB 1291. This bill stipulates that a guardian has the burden to prove by clear and convincing evidence that requested contact with an incapacitated person will be detrimental to the ward’s health, safety, or welfare. It also establishes a supported decision-making agreement form. The agreement authorizes a supporter to assist the incapacitated person in understanding options, responsibilities, and consequences of life decisions. This also allows incapacitated adults to choose where they want to live and what services and care they want to receive.  On its face, SB 1291 prevents probate abuse—and ideally promotes independence and choice in people who would otherwise be subject to a guardianship and/or conservatorship. A person may become a guardian by parental, spousal, or court…
Read More
Why Attorney General Kris Mayes Is Opposing the Kroger-Albertsons Merger

Why Attorney General Kris Mayes Is Opposing the Kroger-Albertsons Merger

Arizona State Law Journal Blog
By Veronica Andreev.  About the Merger  In October 2022, Kroger and Albertsons announced their intent to merge. At the time of the announcement, Kroger operated 2,800 stores in 35 states, and Albertsons operated 2,273 stores in 34 states. As part of the merger, Kroger will engage in a nearly $25 billion takeover of its smaller rival Albertsons and assume $4.7 billion of Albertsons’s debt. The result will be a massive grocery store chain with nearly 5,000 stores across the United States.  In an effort to obtain regulatory approval of the merger, Kroger announced in September 2023 that it would sell more than 400 of its stores to C&S Wholesale Grocers, a longtime supplier to grocery stores, for the sum of $1.9 billion. It will also divest itself of several private…
Read More
Flash Crashes in the Cryptocurrency Market: Who Will Protect Individual Investors?

Flash Crashes in the Cryptocurrency Market: Who Will Protect Individual Investors?

Arizona State Law Journal Blog
By Ryan Larson.  Introduction  Throughout the current downturn in the cryptocurrency market, crypto investors have maintained the motto “Hold On For Dear Life.” The motto may seem especially true when a cryptocurrency such as Ethereum sees a 99% price decrease in a matter of minutes, only to immediately return to its prior price level. These “flash crashes” are not unique to crypto investing, but they occur more frequently on crypto exchanges than on a stock exchange. While these dramatic price dips often last only minutes, they can have massive long-term ramifications for cryptocurrency investors who were forced to sell during the crash because they were trading under certain industry constraints such as margin trades and using stop-loss orders. Flash crashes for even the most obscure of cryptocurrencies can wipe out…
Read More
<em>Tyler v. Hennepin County</em>: Implications For Arizona Tax Foreclosure Law

Tyler v. Hennepin County: Implications For Arizona Tax Foreclosure Law

Arizona State Law Journal Blog
By Abigail Dood.  Tyler v. Hennepin County: Implications for State Tax Foreclosure Law Generally  On May 25, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling in Tyler v. Hennepin County, holding that a provision of Minnesota law that authorized the state to retain all surplus proceeds from the sale of a property at auction for nonpayment of property taxes was an unconstitutional taking. While the exact procedures vary statutorily state by state, generally most states have laws in place that authorize the appropriate governmental unit, such as the county treasurer, to seize an individual’s property after the individual is delinquent on property taxes for a specified period of time. The property is then usually sold at a public tax auction to the highest bidder. If the property sells for an…
Read More
Collectives: The Present and Future of the NIL Landscape

Collectives: The Present and Future of the NIL Landscape

Arizona State Law Journal Blog
By William Bolger.  Setting the Stage  The Supreme Court sent shockwaves through the world of college athletics with its decision in National Collegiate Athletic Association v. Alston. In Alston, the Court invalidated a handful of NCAA rules that restricted athletes’ ability to receive compensation while they were competing. The case, which was decided on antitrust grounds, enabled college athletes to earn money based on their name, image, and likeness (NIL). However, the Alston decision did not universally allow athletes to be paid. The NCAA maintains a clear set of rules prohibiting “pay for play.” In other words, student athletes are not allowed to be paid for their on-field performance, but they are allowed to sign endorsement deals and receive compensation based on the value of their brand. Another key distinction…
Read More