A. The rights enumerated in the victims' bill of rights, article II, section 2.1, Constitution of Arizona, any implementing legislation or court rules belong to the victim. The victim has standing to seek an order, to bring a special action or to file a notice of appearance in a trial court or an appellate proceeding, seeking to enforce any right or to challenge an order denying any right guaranteed to victims. A victim may not be charged a filing fee to file a special action or to seek an order pursuant to this subsection. In asserting any right, the victim has the right to be represented by personal counsel at the victim's expense and the proceedings may be initiated by the victim's counsel or the prosecutor.
B. A victim has the right to recover damages from a governmental entity responsible for the intentional, knowing or grossly negligent violation of the victim's rights under the victims' bill of rights, article II, section 2.1, Constitution of Arizona, any implementing legislation or court rules. Nothing in this section alters or abrogates any provision for immunity provided for under common law or statute.
C. At the request of the victim, the prosecutor may assert any right to which the victim is entitled.
D. On the filing of a notice of appearance, counsel for the victim shall be endorsed on all pleadings and, if present, be included in all bench conferences and in chambers meetings and sessions with the trial court that directly involve a victim's right enumerated in article II, section 2.1, Constitution of Arizona.
E. Notwithstanding any other law and without limiting any rights and powers of the victim, the victim has the right to present evidence or information and to make an argument to the court, personally or through counsel, at any proceeding to determine the amount of restitution pursuant to section 13-804.
Notes of Decisions
Beth Fay v. Hon. fox/state/jordan Hanson, 494 P.3d 1105 (Ariz. 2021).
· cites it 10× “¶34 Our colleagues reach a different result, reasoning that “[t]he right to be heard [on a request for a delayed appeal] is clearly contemplated by A.R.S. § 13-4437(A).” See supra ¶ 21. But this provision does not itself grant rights to victims.”
State v. Nichols, 233 P.3d 1148 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2010).
· cites it 4× “First, A.R.S. § 13-4437(A) and Rule 2(a)(2), Ariz.”
Lynn v. Reinstein, 68 P.3d 412 (Ariz. 2003).
· cites it 2× “2d at 942 (quoting A.R.S. § 13-4437). Moreover, Petitioner conceded at oral argument that even a party may not opine regarding irrelevant facts or unfairly prejudicial issues.”
Lindsay R. v. Cohen, 343 P.3d 435 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2015).
· cites it 4× “The victims have standing to participate in this special action under AR.S. § 13-4437(A). ¶ 6 The victims and the state contend that under the VBR, the VRIA, and Ariz.”
State v. Quijada, 439 P.3d 815 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019).
· cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 13-4437(C) (“At the request of the victim, the prosecutor may assert any right to which the victim is entitled.”
State v. Lee, 245 P.3d 919 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2011).
· cites it 4× “¶ 2 We accept jurisdiction of this special action because A.R.S. § 13-4437(A) and Rule 2(a)(2), Ariz.”
State v. Lamberton, 899 P.2d 939 (Ariz. 1995).
· cites it 3× “Specifically, the Victim cites § 13-4418, which states that the Act “shall be liberally construed to preserve and protect the rights to which victims are entitled”; § 13-4426, which states that the Victim has the right to be heard at any sentencing proceeding; § 13-4428, which…”
State Ex Rel. Thomas v. Klein, 150 P.3d 778 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2007).
· cites it 2× “21(A)(4) (2003); A.R.S. § 13-4437 (2001) (victim, or prosecutor upon victim’s request, has standing to bring special action seeking enforcement of Victims’ Bill of Rights provision).”
E. H. v. Hon. slayton/state, 468 P.3d 1209 (Ariz. 2020).
· cites it 2× “§ 13-4437(A). A victim’s lawyer “shall be endorsed on all pleadings and, if present, be included in all bench conferences and in chambers meetings and sessions with the trial court that directly involve a victim’s right enumerated in article II, section 2.”
State v. Martinson, 384 P.3d 307 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016).
· cites it 2× “filed a "crime victim’s notice of appearance" in this Court, as well as a "Crime Victim’s Brief Pursuant to A.R.S. § 13-4437(A),” arguing the dismissal with prejudice order violated her constitutional rights as a victim.”
State of Arizona v. Vivek a Patel, 486 P.3d 188 (Ariz. 2021).
· cites it 2× “” A.R.S. § 13-4437(E). 7 STATE V. PATEL Opinion of the Court raised by Patel and amici regarding a conflict between a restitution hearing and the right to a civil trial, we have previously observed that the statutory framework for imposing restitution “prevents the restitution…”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-4437(A) — 19 cases
Beth Fay v. Hon. fox/state/jordan Hanson, 494 P.3d 1105 (Ariz. 2021).
“¶34 Our colleagues reach a different result, reasoning that “[t]he right to be heard [on a request for a delayed appeal] is clearly contemplated by A.R.S. § 13-4437(A).” See supra ¶ 21. But this provision does not itself grant rights to victims.”
State v. Lee, 245 P.3d 919 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2011).
“¶ 2 We accept jurisdiction of this special action because A.R.S. § 13-4437(A) and Rule 2(a)(2), Ariz.”
State v. Nichols, 233 P.3d 1148 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2010).
“First, A.R.S. § 13-4437(A) and Rule 2(a)(2), Ariz.”
Lindsay R. v. Cohen, 343 P.3d 435 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2015).
“The victims have standing to participate in this special action under AR.S. § 13-4437(A). ¶ 6 The victims and the state contend that under the VBR, the VRIA, and Ariz.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-4437(B) — 1 case
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-4437(C) — 10 cases
State v. Quijada, 439 P.3d 815 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019).
“A.R.S. § 13-4437(C) (“At the request of the victim, the prosecutor may assert any right to which the victim is entitled.”
State v. Nichols, 233 P.3d 1148 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2010).
“First, A.R.S. § 13-4437(A) and Rule 2(a)(2), Ariz.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-4437(D) — 5 cases
Lindsay R. v. Cohen, 343 P.3d 435 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2015).
“The victims have standing to participate in this special action under AR.S. § 13-4437(A). ¶ 6 The victims and the state contend that under the VBR, the VRIA, and Ariz.”
E. H. v. Hon. slayton/state, 468 P.3d 1209 (Ariz. 2020).
“§ 13-4437(A). A victim’s lawyer “shall be endorsed on all pleadings and, if present, be included in all bench conferences and in chambers meetings and sessions with the trial court that directly involve a victim’s right enumerated in article II, section 2.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-4437(E) — 2 cases
State of Arizona v. Vivek a Patel, 486 P.3d 188 (Ariz. 2021).
“” A.R.S. § 13-4437(E). 7 STATE V. PATEL Opinion of the Court raised by Patel and amici regarding a conflict between a restitution hearing and the right to a civil trial, we have previously observed that the statutory framework for imposing restitution “prevents the restitution…”
Beth Fay v. Hon. fox/state/jordan Hanson, 494 P.3d 1105 (Ariz. 2021).
“¶34 Our colleagues reach a different result, reasoning that “[t]he right to be heard [on a request for a delayed appeal] is clearly contemplated by A.R.S. § 13-4437(A).” See supra ¶ 21. But this provision does not itself grant rights to victims.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.