13-714. Offenses committed with intent to promote, further or assist a criminal street gang
A person who is convicted of committing any felony offense with the intent to promote, further or assist any criminal conduct by a criminal street gang shall not be eligible for suspension of sentence, probation, pardon or release from confinement on any basis except as authorized by section 31-233, subsection A or B until the sentence imposed by the court has been served, the person is eligible for release pursuant to section 41-1604.07 or the sentence is commuted. The presumptive, minimum and maximum sentence for the offense shall be increased by three years if the offense is a class 4, 5 or 6 felony or shall be increased by five years if the offense is a class 2 or 3 felony. The additional sentence imposed pursuant to this section is in addition to any enhanced sentence that may be applicable.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
13
cases (
5 in the last 5 years), 2015–2024 · leading case:
State v. Harm, 340 P.3d 1110 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2015).
State v. Harm, 340 P.3d 1110 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2015).
· cites it 24× “At sentencing, Harm’s conviction was enhanced pursuant to AR.S. § 13-714, which applies when a person “is convicted of committing any felony offense with the intent to promote, further or assist any criminal conduct by a criminal street gang.”
State v. Juarez, No. 1 CA-CR 21-0522 (Ariz. Ct. App. Sept. 20, 2022).
· cites it 11× “DISCUSSION I. Admission of Facebook Evidence ¶6 The State’s case against Juarez required proof that he was Perez’s accomplice and that they were associated with Okie Town.”
State v. Kemp, No. 1 CA-CV 21-0190 (Ariz. Ct. App. Mar. 28, 2023).
· cites it 9× “75 years in prison with 850 days of pre-incarceration credit. See A.R.S. § 13-703(C), (J).”
State v. Benitez, No. 1 CA-CR 19-0458 (Ariz. Ct. App. Dec. 22, 2020).
· cites it 7× “¶10 The superior court sentenced Benitez as a category three repetitive offender to enhanced, concurrent terms of imprisonment on all counts, the longest of which was fifteen years. Benitez timely appealed.”
State v. Benitez, No. 1 CA-CR 19-0458 (Ariz. Ct. App. Aug. 5, 2021).
· cites it 7× “¶10 The superior court sentenced Benitez as a category three repetitive offender to enhanced, concurrent terms of imprisonment on all 3 counts, the longest of which was fifteen years.”
Stair v. Maricopa, 429 P.3d 1151 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2018).
· cites it 2× “, A.R.S. §§ 13-714 (2018) 5 STAIR v. MARICOPA, et al.”
State v. Rodriguez, No. 1 CA-CR 14-0300 (Ariz. Ct. App. Oct. 20, 2015).
· cites it 9× “” A.R.S. § 13-714. As a result, Rodriguez contends that because the preparatory offense for assisting a criminal street gang was the class five felony of conspiracy to commit influencing a witness, the § 13-714 enhancement should only attach to the class five felony and not the…”
State v. Brice, No. 1 CA-CR 23-0348 (Ariz. Ct. App. Oct. 22, 2024).
· cites it 4× “DISCUSSION ¶17 Brice argues that the trial court erred by consolidating the charges, that insufficient evidence supported some of his convictions, and that he received double punishment for the gang offenses.”
State v. Coleman, No. 1 CA-CR 15-0194 (Ariz. Ct. App. Sept. 29, 2016).
· cites it 2× “See A.R.S. § 13-714. Accordingly, the minimum 7 STATE v.”
State v. Mewbourn, No. 1 CA-CR 18-0117 (Ariz. Ct. App. Mar. 26, 2019).
· cites it 2× “§ 13-703(J), plus five years for the aggravators, A.R.S. § 13-714, and ruled that the 3 sentences would run concurrently: 20.”
State v. Estrada, No. 1 CA-CR 18-0873 (Ariz. Ct. App. Mar. 26, 2020).
· cites it 2× “25 years in prison for each count, to run concurrently, with 452 days of presentence incarceration credit. Because Estrada was on probation for two prior felony convictions at the time of these offenses, the court automatically revoked his probation and imposed two additional…”
State v. Bermea, No. 1 CA-CR 23-0339-PRPC (Ariz. Ct. App. Nov. 14, 2023).
· cites it 2× “Yet still, the court found that a seven-year sentence was “clearly excessive” under the circumstances.”
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.