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 rule. 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
Cited in
3
cases, 2008–2017 · leading case:
In re Michelle G., 173 P.3d 1041 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008).
In re Michelle G., 173 P.3d 1041 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008).
· cites it 14× “" A.R.S. § 8-416(B) (citation omitted). The special concurrence correctly notes that the victim will be required to clear additional hurdles in order to receive restitution from the state based on the state's "nonfeasance.”
State v. Skipwith, 165 A.3d 1211 (Conn. 2017).
“§ 3771 [d] [3] and ordering trial court to conduct new sentencing hearing allowing victims to speak if other statutory requirements met); Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. §§ 8-416 A and 13-4437 A (West Supp.”
In re Michelle G., No. 2 CA-JV 2007-0014 (Ariz. Ct. App. Jan. 10, 2008).
· cites it 7× “” A.R.S. § 8-416(B) (citation omitted). The special concurrence correctly notes that the victim will be required to clear additional hurdles in order to receive restitution from the state based on the state’s “nonfeasance.”
Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 8-416(B): 2 cases
In re Michelle G., 173 P.3d 1041 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008).
“" A.R.S. § 8-416(B) (citation omitted). The special concurrence correctly notes that the victim will be required to clear additional hurdles in order to receive restitution from the state based on the state's "nonfeasance.”
In re Michelle G., No. 2 CA-JV 2007-0014 (Ariz. Ct. App. Jan. 10, 2008).
“” A.R.S. § 8-416(B) (citation omitted). The special concurrence correctly notes that the victim will be required to clear additional hurdles in order to receive restitution from the state based on the state’s “nonfeasance.”
Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 8-416(C): 2 cases
In re Michelle G., 173 P.3d 1041 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008).
“" A.R.S. § 8-416(B) (citation omitted). The special concurrence correctly notes that the victim will be required to clear additional hurdles in order to receive restitution from the state based on the state's "nonfeasance.”
In re Michelle G., No. 2 CA-JV 2007-0014 (Ariz. Ct. App. Jan. 10, 2008).
“” A.R.S. § 8-416(B) (citation omitted). The special concurrence correctly notes that the victim will be required to clear additional hurdles in order to receive restitution from the state based on the state’s “nonfeasance.”
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.