Herbert F. Krucker

The case involved a dispute over whether Pima County could require a subdivider to provide assurances for off-site improvements before approving a final plat. Appellant Gerard Anderson sued the county and its Board of Supervisors after the trial court dismissed his complaint, upholding the Board's interim policy despite the plat meeting all other requirements. The Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the Board lacked authority to impose the policy because it had not followed the statutory procedures in A.R.S. § 11-806.01, including public hearings and notice. The court reasoned that the Board's zoning and subdivision powers derive from state enabling legislation, making strict compliance with hearing and notice requirements jurisdictional, and that noncompliant measures are void. It directed entry of judgment requiring approval of the plat.

propertyprocedurebusiness & regulatory

The case involved Vend-A-Coin's 15-year Location Agreement with an apartment complex manager to install and operate coin laundry machines in exchange for 35% of gross receipts, with the owner agreeing not to install competing equipment; the agreement was recorded and included a successors clause. After the property was sold, the new owner authorized competitor Leon Ulan to replace Vend-A-Coin's machines, leading to a lawsuit for breach of contract and tortious interference with contract that resulted in a jury verdict awarding Vend-A-Coin damages. The appellate court held that the agreement constituted a revocable license rather than a lease or irrevocable license coupled with an interest, so it did not bind the subsequent purchaser, and Ulan's actions did not amount to tortious interference. The court reversed the judgment and directed entry of judgment in favor of Ulan.

business & regulatorypropertytorts & liability

In Price v. Sunmaster, homeowners contracted with a contractor for labor and materials to build improvements on their mobile home situated on one parcel of real property; after the improvements were moved to a second parcel, the homeowners failed to pay the contractor, who recorded a mechanics' lien and obtained a default judgment foreclosing the lien on both parcels and awarding a money judgment, all via service by publication after personal service failed. The trial court denied the homeowners' motion to vacate the judgment entered more than two years earlier. The appellate court reversed, holding that the judgment was void because the complaint failed to state a claim for a lien under A.R.S. § 33-981 as the improvements were personal chattels rather than fixtures to realty, and because service by publication could not confer personal jurisdiction for an in personam money judgment, which requires personal service.

propertyprocedure

The case involved an appeal from a conviction for possession of heroin for sale and a prison sentence of seven to ten years. The court reversed the judgment and sentence, holding that the defendant's waiver of a jury trial was not reflected on the record as knowingly and voluntarily made, which violated constitutional requirements under Boykin v. Alabama. It further ruled that the initial police entry into the residence was justified by exigent circumstances but the later warrantless search that uncovered the drugs was unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment. The court rejected the claim that the prosecution should have been dismissed under Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 8, finding that any prior dismissal was without prejudice and caused no actual prejudice to the defendant.

criminal lawprocedure

This case involved an appeal from a juvenile court order finding that the appellant was not the father of a one-year-old child and alternatively terminating his parental rights. The court affirmed the termination on the grounds of abandonment, concluding that the appellant had failed to make any efforts to support the child or maintain a parental relationship after reasonably knowing of the child's conception and birth. The reasoning was based on findings that the appellant did not contact adoption services promptly, provided no support, had sporadic employment, and showed no interest in the child's welfare, satisfying the statutory requirements under A.R.S. § 8-533 for termination due to abandonment. The court did not address the paternity claims since the severance was upheld.

family law

The case involved appellant's jury conviction for possession of marijuana for sale under Arizona law, based on a vehicle stop and search that uncovered approximately 450 pounds of marijuana, along with related evidence from his home obtained via a telephonic warrant. Appellant challenged the conviction, arguing prosecutorial misconduct that violated his fair trial and confrontation rights, and lack of probable cause for the warrantless arrest and search due to an unverified informant. The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the single improper comment implying court-prosecution linkage and other statements were not prejudicial because they were objected to, the jury was instructed to disregard them, and the evidence was strong. On probable cause, the court reasoned that an identified citizen-informant reporting unusual activity was sufficiently reliable without further testing under Aguilar standards, the officers' observations and the smell of marijuana independently supported the stop and search, and the fruits of the search were admissible.

criminal lawprocedure