Summary
The Arizona Court of Appeals, Division One, accepted special action jurisdiction over John Adam Wake’s challenge to the dismissal of his petition to seal criminal records under A.R.S. § 13-911. The court held that the statute requires completion of all nonmonetary probation conditions, including community service, before a person may petition to seal criminal records. Because Wake had not completed the required community service, the court denied relief.
Holdings
- The Court of Appeals may accept special action jurisdiction because Wake had no equally plain, speedy, and adequate remedy by appeal; the statutory appeal provision applies when the court denies the petition or eligibility to petition, whereas the superior court dismissed Wake's petition for insufficient information.
- A person placed on probation must complete all nonmonetary terms and conditions of probation, including ordered community-service hours, before petitioning to seal criminal records under A.R.S. § 13-911(E).
- Discharge from probation does not establish that all incomplete nonmonetary probation conditions were completed for purposes of A.R.S. § 13-911 eligibility.
Questions Presented
- Whether the Court of Appeals should accept special action jurisdiction when the superior court dismissed, rather than denied, a petition to seal criminal records and an appeal therefore was not available under A.R.S. § 13-4033(A)(5).
- Whether A.R.S. § 13-911 requires a person placed on probation to complete all nonmonetary probation conditions, including ordered community-service hours, before petitioning to seal criminal records.
- Whether discharge from probation constitutes completion of incomplete community-service conditions for purposes of eligibility to petition under A.R.S. § 13-911.
Disposition
writ_denied
Cases Cited (11)
- Yauck v. W. Town Bank & Tr., 259 Ariz. 481, 485, ¶ 12 (App. 2025)(followed)
- Sierra Tucson, Inc. v. Lee ex rel. County of Pima, 230 Ariz. 255, 257, ¶ 7 (App. 2012)(followed)
- State v. Dies, 1 CA-CR 25-0317, 2026 WL 534630, at *1, ¶ 8 (Ariz. App. Feb. 26, 2026) (mem. decision)(followed)
- State v. Luviano, 255 Ariz. 225, 227-28, ¶¶ 7, 10 (2023)(followed)
- Twin City Fire Ins. Co. v. Burke, 204 Ariz. 251, 254, ¶ 10 (2003)(followed)
- State v. Muldoon, 159 Ariz. 295, 298 (1988)(followed)
- State v. Serrato, 259 Ariz. 493, 496, ¶ 9 (2025)(followed)
- Nicaise v. Sandaram, 245 Ariz. 566, 568, ¶ 11 (2019)(followed)
- France v. Indus. Comm'n, 250 Ariz. 487, 490, ¶ 13 (2021)(followed)
- State v. Smith, 112 Ariz. 416, 419 (1975)(followed)
Showing top 10 of 11.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…