Category Archives: Courts

Third Illegal Alien lawsuit by ACLU against Sheriff Driscoll dismissed by Superior Court

Posted on by

On June 13, 2019, Superior Court Judge Mark R. Moran dismissed Plaintiff Jose Montelongo-Morales’ class action lawsuit against Coconino County Sheriff James Driscoll and Coconino County Jail Commander Matt Figueroa. The Court found Plaintiff Montelongo-Morales lacked standing to bring the action. The dismissal of this lawsuit marks the third time Arizona courts have dismissed an action against Sheriff Driscoll and Commander Figueroa for honoring Department of Homeland Security/ICE detainers and warrants in order to cooperate with federal law enforcement authorities in their lawful enforcement of federal immigration law.

In the ACLU’s latest attempt to frustrate the lawful enforcement of federal law, Plaintiff Jose Montelongo-Morales sued Sheriff Driscoll and Commander Figueroa for supposedly unlawfully holding him pursuant to an Immigration Detainer and a Warrant for Removal/Detention. Subsequently, DHS/ICE withdrew the Immigration Detainer for Plaintiff Montelongo-Morales and, after posting bond, he was released from custody.

Sheriff Driscoll and Commander Figueroa filed a motion to dismiss Montelongo-Morales’ lawsuit because he lacked standing to bring the action. The Honorable Mark R. Moran, Judge of the Superior Court of the State of Arizona, ruled as follows:

In the present case, the Plaintiff lacks standing to bring this action. ICE had removed the detainer at the time he posted bond and left the jail. Thus, he was no longer subject to the very policy he asked this Court to declare as unconstitutional. Plaintiff has not suffered ‘a distinct and palpable injury’ that this Court can redress. He no longer has a direct stake in the outcome of the controversy. In short, Plaintiff does not satisfy the basic standing requirement of being a true adversary for the life of this litigation.

Based on the above ruling by the Court, Judge Moran granted Sheriff Driscoll and Commander Figueroa’s Motion to Dismiss Montelongo-Morales’ lawsuit.

The dismissal of Montelongo-Morales’ lawsuit is not the first time there has been an unsuccessful attempt to prevent the Coconino County Sheriff’s Office from cooperating with the Department of Homeland Security. Earlier this year, the Honorable Fannie Steinlage, another judge in the Superior Court of the State of Arizona, denied another inmate’s application for a Temporary Restraining Order requesting that Sheriff Driscoll be ordered to refrain from cooperating with ICE. Judge Steinlage ruled that Jesus Quiroz-Villalobos did not establish a likelihood of success on the merits of his case. That case was then voluntarily dismissed by Quiroz-Villalobos on April 24, 2019.

Nearly one year ago, on July 6, 2018, United States District Court Judge David Campbell denied Plaintiff Guillermo Tenorio-Serrano’s Motion for a Preliminary Injunction challenging Sheriff Driscoll’s policy of holding persons in State custody for up to 48 additional hours, as requested in ICE detainers and warrants. Judge Campbell ruled that he could not conclude Plaintiff Tenorio-Serrano was likely to succeed on his claims. Judge Campbell also ruled that Sheriff Driscoll would face serious hardship if the Court ordered him to refrain from complying with ICE detainers. He noted the injunction would interfere with the Sheriff’s judgment as an elected official, would interfere with the Arizona legislature’s policy determination in S.B. 1070 that Arizona should cooperate with federal immigration enforcement, and may also interfere with the State of Arizona’s interest in preventing unlawful immigration, as recognized by the United States Supreme Court.

Sheriff Driscoll and the Coconino County Sheriff’s Office will continue to cooperate with the Department of Homeland Security/ICE in its lawful attempt to enforce federal immigration law. Sheriff Driscoll recognizes and strongly supports the rule of law and will make every effort to enforce the law and protect the community.

Coconino County Courts host Law Day

Posted on by

FLAGSTAFF — Coconino County Courts are hosting Law Day at the Coconino County Courthouse at 200 N. San Francisco Street in Flagstaff. The proceedings will begin at 8:45 a.m. Friday, May 3, 2019.

This year’s Law Day theme is “Free Speech, Free Press, Free Society.” The theme provides an opportunity to explore the ways the First Amendment has shaped American law and society. Law Day activities in Flagstaff are coordinated by Coconino County Superior Court, the Coconino County Bar Association and local attorneys. The theme is selected by the American Bar Association each year.

Throughout the day, local middle and high school students will participate in Moot Courts. Students prepare, present and argue cases with the assistance of local attorneys in front of a Superior Court Judge. This opportunity shows students the complexities of the legal system.

The Coconino County Board of Supervisors approved a proclamation during the April 17 regular meeting declaring May 3, 2019 as Law Day in the County. This was in accordance with the nationally recognized day for commemoration.

The public is encouraged to attend and participate in all activities for this year’s Law Day.

Board of Supervisors & District Nominating Committees solicit applications for the Commission on Trial Court Appointments

Posted on by

FLAGSTAFF – Applicants are being sought to fill positions for the Commission on Trial Court Appointments for Coconino County District 1, District 2 and District 3. District 4 and District 5 are developing their nominating committees and will be seeking applications for the Commission shortly.

In 2018, Coconino County voters elected to change the selection of Superior Court Judges from a partisan-popular election to a merit selection-judicial retention election. When a Superior Court vacancy occurs, the Coconino County Commission on Trial Court Appointments provides a list of qualified attorneys to the Governor whom appoints a new judge from the list for the Coconino County Superior Court.

Requirements for non-attorney applicants are:

  • Applicant must have resided in the State for at least five years.
  • Applicant must have resided in the supervisorial district from which appointed for at least one year before being nominated (To determine your current Supervisorial District, call 928-679-7144 or visit the Elections Website at: https://coconinocounty.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=c4d1cdcd9f73452dbbf2908d035eda32
  • The applicant cannot be a judge, a retired judge or an attorney admitted to practice law in Arizona.
  • The applicant cannot hold any governmental office, elective or appointive, for profit (i.e. salary, commission, etc.) (An appointee can be a governmental employee.)

Applications along with the Committee’s recommendation for appointment will be forwarded to the Governor who shall make appointments subject to confirmation of the Arizona Senate.

To apply, please contact the following by April 30, 2019:

District 1 – Send a letter and resume to Michele Ralston, Executive Assistant to Supervisor Art Babbott, ATTN: Commission on Trial Court Appointments Nominating Committee, 219 E. Cherry Ave. Flagstaff, Arizona 86001.

District 2 – Send a letter and resume to Theresa M. Munoz, Executive Assistant to Supervisor Elizabeth Archuleta, ATTENTION: Commission on Trial Court Appointments Nominating Committee, 219 E. Cherry Ave. Flagstaff, Arizona 86001.

District 3 – Send a letter and resume to Gregory Nelson, Executive Assistant to Supervisor Matt Ryan, ATTN: Commission on Trial Court Appointments Nominating Committee, 219 E. Cherry Ave. Flagstaff, Arizona 86001.

Judge Ted S. Reed appointed Presiding Juvenile Court Judge

Posted on by

Judge Ted S. Reed – Coconino County Photo

FLAGSTAFF – The Coconino County Presiding Superior Court Judge Mark R. Moran has appointed Judge Ted S. Reed as the Presiding Juvenile Court Judge.

As Presiding Juvenile Court Judge, Reed will be responsible for the oversight of operations of the Juvenile Court, including Juvenile Detention, Juvenile Probation and Juvenile Programming.

“I am pleased to appoint such a qualified person to such an important position,” said Judge Moran. “Judge Reed’s involvement in the Juvenile Court over the last eight years and his dedication to the staff, kids and families in our Juvenile Justice System made him the top choice for Presiding Juvenile Court Judge.”

In 2011 Judge Reed was appointed as Judge Pro Tempore for the Superior Court, serving Division 6. His caseload included juvenile delinquency, family law and Recovery Court. In 2019, Judge Reed was elected to Division 1 of the Superior Court when Judge Hatch retired.

“I am honored to be selected as the Presiding Juvenile Court Judge and want to acknowledge the tremendous accomplishments of my predecessor and mentor, the Honorable Margaret McCullough,” said Judge Reed. “I look forward to building on the success of our Coconino County Juvenile Justice System and working with a professional and dedicated staff whose focus is on the well-being of the kids. It is truly humbling to receive this opportunity to lead the Juvenile Court in advancing the initiatives we currently are working on and developing further creative solutions to help our kids and families succeed.”

Prior to Judge Reed’s judicial service, he was in private practice in criminal defense and family law and served as a Deputy Coconino County Attorney from 2005-2008.

Valerie Wyant elected President of the Clerk’s Association

Posted on by

FLAGSTAFF — Clerk of the Superior Court, Valerie Wyant has been named the President-Elect of the Arizona Association of Superior Court Clerks (AASCC). The President works as the liaison between the AASCC, the Arizona Supreme Court’s Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC), the Arizona Association of Counties (AACo), state legislators and various other agencies.

“I am thrilled for the opportunity to represent the Clerk’s Association in the leadership role of President,” said Association President-Elect Valerie Wyant. “In the role of President, I will have the amazing opportunity to participate in and work with a number of statewide and national committees and associations. It is truly an honor to represent the fine women and men who serve as Clerks of the Court in Arizona.”

Wyant worked in the office of the Navajo County Clerk of Superior Court for 13 years, and one year as the Clerk of Superior Court in 2010. Wyant was appointed Chief Deputy Clerk of Superior Court, Coconino County in January 2011. In 2014, she was elected Clerk of Superior Court for Coconino County.

The Clerk of the Superior Court’s Office was established by the Arizona Constitution as one of several elected offices with specific and special duties, serves as the official record keepers and financial officers for the Superior Court. The Clerk of the Superior Court services more than 500 state statutes and court rules.

Wyant will assume the role of President effective January 2018.

Special Saturday Court in Flagstaff

Posted on by

FLAGSTAFF – The Flagstaff Justice Court and the Superior Court Clerk of the Court will hold a special Saturday Court, from 9 a.m. to noon, September 16 at the Superior Court/Flagstaff Justice Court building, 200 N. San Francisco Street.

Justice of the Peace Howard Grodman, Clerk of Superior Court Valerie Wyant and Chairwoman of the Coconino County Board of Supervisors, Liz Archuleta initiated the Saturday Court services so people can receive court services who normally can’t during the standard operating hours.

Individuals with outstanding warrants can appear before the judge and resolve pending legal issues. Only customers with cases from the Flagstaff Justice Court will be assisted during this event. People with pending warrants from another court should call the appropriate issuing court to discuss options.

Service windows will be open for people to pay court fees and fines by setting up payment plans or reestablishing a payment plan already in place for pending cases.

The Clerk of Superior Court’s Office will also be open to file paperwork, apply for a passport or obtain a marriage license.

For questions please contact Maia Rodriguez at the Flagstaff Justice Court at 928-679-7675.

AzCourtHelp.org earns international award

Posted on by

FLAGSTAFF — The National Association for Court Managers (NACM), in partnership with the International Association for Court Administration (IACA), awarded AzCourtHelp.org top honors for this year’s top 10 Court Technology Solutions Awards.

The awards are given each year to recognize courts that make the best use of technology to improve courts’ service and access to the public. AZCourtHelp.org was selected to receive the award over entries from Dubai, Rwanda and several other states within the U.S.

“I want to congratulate the courts for this great achievement and receiving this worldwide recognition,” said Chairwoman Liz Archuleta. “It is the court system’s innovative ideas and dedication to the community which continually make our system more efficient and more accessible for everyone.”

AzCourtHelp.org offers free assistance to people who need help resolving disputes or have legal questions regarding divorce and custody, landlord/tenant issues, civil dispute and criminal charges. Residents outside of Flagstaff can participate due to an onsite and virtual legal self-help program which helps save time, effort and money to more fully understand their legal rights and obligations. It’s also helpful to self-represented litigants who would not have access to legal resources in their area.

Coconino County Superior Court and the Law Library are major stakeholders of AzCourtHelp.org and selected to pilot this program because of available resources and previous success with innovative programs. Other stakeholders that contributed to the development include:

• Arizona Administrative Office of the Courts
• The Arizona Foundation for Legal Services and Education
• Arizona State Library, Archives, & Public Records
• The Office of the Arizona Attorney General
• The Department of Economic Security’s Division of Child Support Services

Free live webinars on popular topics are available at AzCourtHelp.org/public-events or you may attend in person at the Coconino County Law Library.

Superior Court hosts Law Day

Posted on by

FLAGSTAFF – Coconino County Superior Court and DNA Legal Services are hosting Law Day at the Coconino County Courthouse. The proceedings will begin at 8:45 a.m. Friday, May 5, 2017.

This year’s theme is “The Fourteenth Amendment: Transforming American Democracy.” The theme provides an opportunity to explore the ways the Fourteenth Amendment has shaped American law and society. During Law Day, legal professionals and community leaders educate students on how the Fourteenth Amendment contributes to the freedoms and equal protection for all Americans. The theme is selected by the American Bar Association each year.

Throughout the day, local middle and high school students will participate in Moot Courts. Students prepare, present and argue cases with the assistance of local attorneys in front of a Superior Court Judge.

The Coconino County Board of Supervisors approved a proclamation during the April 18 regular meeting declaring May 5, 2017 as Law Day in the County. This was in accordance with the nationally recognized day for commemoration.

The public is encouraged to attend and participate in all activities for this year’s Law Day.

AZGFD considers potential impacts of appellate court ruling on Mexican wolf

Posted on by

PHOENIX — The Arizona Game and Fish Department is assessing potential impacts to Arizona’s endangered and threatened wildlife recovery program, following a 10th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that lifts a preliminary injunction on releasing Mexican wolves in New Mexico.

The court decision issued Tuesday held that the State of New Mexico had not met the legal standard for a preliminary injunction because it did not demonstrate that releasing Mexican wolves without state permits will cause irreparable injury to the state. The ruling reverses a U.S. District Court decision last summer that prohibited the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service from importing or releasing any Mexican wolves in New Mexico without first obtaining permits from the New Mexico Game and Fish Department.

“The Arizona Game and Fish Commission and Department are evaluating the potential ramifications of the Appellate Court’s decision for Arizona’s wolf recovery program,” said Jim deVos, AZGFD assistant director for Wildlife Management. “Our agency remains committed to working with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and our other partners to ensure Arizona has a voice in providing direction for the program, based on sound science and boots-on-the-ground research.”

The case now returns to U.S. District Court for a decision on whether New Mexico can require the USFWS to obtain state permits before releasing wolves.

There were a minimum of 113 wolves in the wild in Arizona and New Mexico in 2016, according to a recent survey by the Mexican Wolf Interagency Field Team. The survey found that there were 63 wolves in Arizona and 50 in New Mexico.

In 2015, there were an estimated 97 wolves were counted in the wild between both states.

Williams City Council sends Justice Court IGA back for more study

Posted on by

williams-justice-courtWILLIAMS — The Williams City Council considered a proposal to revise the intergovernmental agreement (IGA) with the Williams Justice Court at the meeting on Thursday the 14th. The proposal was to provide more money for the addition of a bailiff and a 2.5% merit raise for the county employees acting on behalf of the city.

The City of Williams has the authority to conduct its own city court business for violations of Williams ordinances. The city could hire its own magistrate, impose and collect fines and so-forth. The Williams Justice Court provides these services to the city under the terms of the IGA for a cost. The original IGA did not account for the services of a bailiff or merit raises for employees.

Under the proposed revisions to the IGA, the city would pay 25% of the services of the bailiff added to the Williams Justice Court. This would add approximately $5,550 annually to the agreement. The position of bailiff was added without consulting the City of Williams.

Judge Krombeen explained that the bailiff position was necessary because the court occasionally reviews cases where disputing parties may become violent. The Williams Police Department may not be able to provide security in those cases. Judge Krombeen explained that the court was responsible for security.

While many cases are heard via video link with the Flagstaff Detention Center, there are cases where the defendant has been released on bail to appear in court at a later date. For example, in a domestic dispute situation, the police will usually take one of the parties into custody for safety, but that person may be released on bail. Both of the disputing parties would then appear in person for the court date creating a possible situation in the court.

Judge Krombeen explained,

“But the protective orders and the other types of cases that we are dealing with on a weekly basis are the bigger portion of the reality of the challenge that we face.

We keep a log of all of the weapons that the bailiff has taken off of folks coming into the court room over the last three-years and its a surprising number. I think I reported in the previous report we’ve had someone show up with swords in the court and we’ve had a number of incidents; crimes committed. Victims have been victimized at the court house and I’ve reported that information to you in the last couple of years.”

The City Council did not necessarily object to adding the bailiff. In fact Councilman Lee Payne indicated that he was surprised that there was not a State law requiring a bailiff.

Vice Mayor Don Dent said after the meeting that the council receives reports from the police department daily and he was surprised to see an increase in domestic violence cases in Williams.

The 2.5% merit raise was a major concern to the Council. The City Council agreed that it was an oversight on the part of the IGA, but they were concerned about the figure and the fact that they had no oversight into the merit increases as they do with other city employees.

Another point of contention was that if the city agreed to a flat 2.5% each year and the county pay raise was less than that figure, where would the extra money go? They were concerned that they could not account for the expenditures of money if they paid the 2.5% and the merit increase for the year was less than that.

Councilman Payne said that it would be hard to explain to city employees why the City is paying for a flat 2.5% pay raise for the county employees conducting city business when they might only be able to give proper city employees less of a pay raise or no pay raise at all for that same year.

Judge Krombeen pointed out that there were no city employees at the Williams Justice Center, but county employees conducting city business.

Vice Mayor Don Dent suggested that the IGA should read that the City of Williams would pay whatever the merit raise for the county is each year up to the 2.5%, but not obligate to a fixed 2.5% figure.

Councilman Craig Fritsinger summed up the council position.

“I won’t sign that,” he said. “I won’t agree to that and I don’t think anyone on the council would agree to that. From my perspective, what you said is perfectly appropriate. I would like to have you bring back a re-written document that eliminates that two-and-a-half every year. We can’t explain that to the pubic, to the newspaper, to our employees…. So change it. Bring it back. We’ll work on it.”

The Council voted to table the IGA and have Councilmen Bernie Hiemenz, Jim Wurgler and Frank McNelly work with the City Manager to study the proposal and return with a more equitable proposal for the city.
640-clark-20111229-23
At the meeting the city councilman unanimously voted to approve the 2015-2016 budget. They also agreed to accept a Joint Project Agreement to conduct pavement maintenance on the runway at H.A. Clark Memorial Field. According to Brandon Buchanan, the city would be responsible for 10% of the cost of the repair.

“We would be responsible for ten-percent of that which would be $98,000 of the almost nine-million dollar cost of the project,” Buchanan said.