State ex rel. Romley v. Martin, 205 Ariz. 279

Summary

The Arizona Supreme Court held that convictions subject to Proposition 200's mandatory probation provisions cannot be used to impeach a witness under Arizona Rule of Evidence 609(a)(1). The court reasoned that the relevant offenses were not punishable by imprisonment in excess of one year under the law applicable to those convictions, affirming the denial of the State's request for special action relief.

Holdings

1. A first- or second-time Proposition 200 conviction may not be used to impeach a witness under Rule 609(a)(1) because the conviction is not for a crime punishable by death or imprisonment in excess of one year under the law applicable to that conviction.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a first- or second-time Proposition 200 conviction, for which imprisonment is unavailable under A.R.S. § 13-901.01(A), may be used to impeach a witness under Arizona Rule of Evidence 609(a)(1).
2. Whether the treatment of Proposition 200 convictions as felonies for sentencing-enhancement purposes under State v. Christian and State v. Thues permits their use for impeachment under Rule 609(a)(1).

Disposition

affirmed