James E. Novak
Published on:

By

If you have a criminal case in Phoenix, the pretrial conference is usually the first court date where your case can move in a meaningful way. The Law Office of James E. Novak uses this hearing to force clarity on the evidence, lock in deadlines, and position the case for dismissal, reduction, or trial-ready motion practice. In Arizona, a prosecutor still must prove the charge beyond a reasonable doubt, and the pretrial conference is where a good defense starts pressing that burden with structure.

Why This Hearing Matters More Than People Expect

Most people picture court as “trial or no trial.” Pretrial is where the real work happens. In Maricopa County, the judge uses this hearing to confirm where the case stands and to set the schedule that controls what happens next. Your defense uses it to expose weak proof, demand missing discovery, and tee up motions that can limit or exclude evidence.

In Arizona, a pretrial conference is not just a status check. In Phoenix, it is a leverage moment because it forces the state to show how ready it really is. A prosecutor still must prove admissibility before a jury can hear statements or see seized evidence.

Continue reading →

Published on:

By

People often assume a felony conviction automatically blocks firearm possession forever. Arizona law does not always work that way. For some first-time, non-dangerous, non-serious felony convictions, firearm rights can be automatically restored once probation ends, provided restitution is paid. A recent Arizona Court of Appeals decision, State v. Begay, confirms that the key date is the end of probation, not when the offense occurred or when sentencing occurred.

That detail matters in everyday life. Many prohibited possessor cases begin with a routine traffic stop, a call for service, or a search unrelated to the issue. If your rights are restored by operation of law, the legal status at the moment of possession becomes the center of the case.

Arizona Firearm Rights Restoration After Felony Probation

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

What “Domestic Violence” Means Under Arizona Law

In Arizona, domestic violence is not a stand-alone crime. It is a tag that can attach to other charges like assault, criminal damage, disorderly conduct, or harassment when the parties have a qualifying relationship. Qualifying relationships include spouses, former partners, people who share a child, household members, and certain dating relationships. The domestic violence tag increases potential penalties and can affect rights involving firearms and housing.

The Immediate Aftermath: Arrest, Conditions of Release, and Contact Rules

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

If you have an old Arizona marijuana case, you might hope that Proposition 207 clears everything off your record. A recent Arizona Court of Appeals decision from November 12, 2025, shows that some marijuana convictions still do not qualify, especially when the underlying conduct involved selling cannabis, even if the final conviction does not use the word “sale.” This ruling matters if you resolved a case through a plea to charges like facilitation or solicitation that initially came from sale or transport-for-sale counts.

The court explained that judges look at what actually happened in your case, not just the title printed on the judgment, when they decide whether Arizona’s expungement statute applies. That approach can help some people, but it also denies relief to others whose cases involve conduct that Prop 207 never legalized.

How Prop 207 Marijuana Expungement Works In Arizona

Proposition 207, the Smart and Safe Arizona Act, legalized certain adult possession and use of marijuana and created a special expungement process for older cases. Under Arizona Revised Statutes section 36-2862, you can ask the court to vacate judgments, dismiss complaints, and seal records when your case is based on qualifying marijuana conduct that occurred before November 30, 2020.

Continue reading →

Published on:

By

When you face a criminal charge in Arizona, the pretrial conference can shape everything that follows. You use this court date to lock down discovery, set motion schedules, and position your case for either a better offer or a cleaner trial. The Law Office of James E. Novak helps you treat this hearing as a strategic opportunity that protects your rights from day one.

What a Pretrial Conference Is Under Arizona Rules

A pretrial conference is a court proceeding in which the judge reviews case progress, confirms discovery, and sets the path forward. You attend with your lawyer, you address disclosure under the rules, you confirm pending motions, and you discuss whether resolution makes sense. Arizona’s Rules of Criminal Procedure define these steps, and you gain leverage when you arrive prepared to hold the State to those requirements. You should view this hearing as a focused check on real progress rather than a routine calendar call.

Tasks To Complete Before Your Pretrial Conference

You strengthen your position when you complete a thorough disclosure audit and a focused motion plan. You verify that police reports, body camera files, 911 audio, dispatch logs, lab packets, calibration records, and chain of custody documents are all produced and legible. You confirm that phone extractions, social media captures, and surveillance clips are preserved in original formats with the necessary metadata. You insist on full compliance with Arizona disclosure duties before you consider any proposal from the State. You work with your lawyer to draft targeted motions that address suppression, late disclosure, unreliable testing, and improper opinion testimony so the court can set firm hearing dates. You arrive at the conference with written evidence requests, a witness list that notes availability issues, and subpoenas ready for service if needed. You also prepare a negotiation range that reflects provable facts, likely evidentiary rulings, and realistic sentencing exposure rather than fear or guesswork. You walk in organized, you put gaps on the record, and you create momentum that carries into motions, plea discussions, and trial preparation.

Continue reading →

Published on:

By

Resisting arrest is a serious criminal charge in Arizona that can carry lasting consequences, even if you believe the arrest itself was unjustified. Prosecutors often file this charge alongside other offenses like disorderly conduct, DUI, or assault. Understanding how Arizona law defines resisting arrest can help you avoid making your situation worse and may even help you beat the charge entirely.

If you are facing this accusation, you need to take the situation seriously. A conviction can result in jail time, a criminal record, and problems with employment or licensing. Working with a criminal defense attorney early in the process gives you the best chance to protect your rights and challenge weak or exaggerated claims by law enforcement.

Arizona’s Resisting Arrest Law Explained

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

In July 2025, federal prosecutors announced the arrival of a high-profile foreign national charged with drug trafficking and firearms violations. After a dramatic arrest overseas, U.S. authorities transferred the accused to New York for trial. Although the case centers on international charges, it highlights several key issues that are particularly relevant to anyone in Arizona facing serious criminal allegations. If you are under investigation or charged in connection with federal drug or weapons offenses, this case shows how far law enforcement agencies can go and what you may encounter at each stage.

Federal Conspiracy Charges Can Involve Minimal Direct Contact

Federal conspiracy laws permit prosecutors to charge individuals with a wide range of alleged conduct. In many cases, physical possession or direct handling of drugs or weapons is not required. Even minimal or indirect involvement may result in charges under federal law. The case unfolding in New York highlights how prosecutors often build cases using communications, financial records, and associations, rather than catching someone in the act.

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

In June 2025, the Arizona Court of Appeals issued a detailed decision that addresses several trial rights crucial to a strong criminal defense. The court in State v. Vallejo upheld a conviction in a Pima County case, but not without clarifying how trial judges should handle voir dire, defense witnesses, and confession evidence. Even though the appeal did not result in a reversal, the opinion offers critical guidance for anyone facing charges in Arizona.

If you have been accused of a crime in Arizona, your future may depend on what happens during jury selection, what evidence the court admits, and whether your defense is given a full opportunity to present its case. These procedural rulings carry weight far beyond one courtroom. Understanding them can help protect your rights from the moment charges are filed.

Voir Dire Challenges Require Careful Record and Strategy

One key issue in the case involved jury selection. The accused argued that the trial court failed to question jurors thoroughly about possible bias. Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 18.5 grants judges broad discretion during voir dire, but that discretion must still respect the right to an impartial jury. The Court of Appeals examined the record and found that, although some questions could have gone further, the process overall met constitutional standards.

This part of the opinion reinforces the importance of being strategic and specific when questioning jurors. Defense lawyers must be prepared to raise concerns early and on the record. Without a documented objection or request for additional voir dire, it becomes difficult to argue on appeal that jurors were not properly vetted for fairness.

Continue reading →

Published on:

By

Many people assume that if someone threatens them, they can defend themselves later on. Arizona law, however, draws a clear line. The right to use force only applies when the threat is immediate. A recent aggravated assault case from the Arizona Court of Appeals illustrates the importance of timing. Once a person leaves the scene and then comes back to confront the same individual, the law no longer treats that conduct as self-defense.

The case stemmed from an argument that began inside a bar in Mohave County. Tensions escalated, and after exchanging words with another patron, the accused left the scene. He returned minutes later and confronted the same individual in the parking lot. A fight broke out, and prosecutors later charged him with aggravated assault, pointing to the presence of a knife during the confrontation. At trial, he asserted that he acted in self-defense, arguing that prior threats from the other individual justified his response. The jury disagreed, and the conviction was affirmed on appeal. The court found that by leaving and later returning to the scene, the immediacy required for a justification defense no longer applied. Arizona courts tend to interpret use-of-force claims narrowly, focusing heavily on whether the response was immediate and necessary under the circumstances presented at trial.

Understanding Arizona’s Justification Statute

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

If you were convicted of a felony in Phoenix and are considering filing for post-conviction relief, a recent Arizona Court of Appeals ruling makes one thing clear. Once the court rules on your petition, your opportunity to revise it is limited. After the initial decision, you must act quickly and with strong justification if you want to change your petition. But even better is to avoid the need for a post-conviction proceeding by handling the case right the first time around.

Court Rejects Effort to Amend Years After Sentencing

The petitioner in this case had been found guilty of serious offenses, including second-degree murder, kidnapping, and burglary. His attorney presented a guilty except insane defense under Arizona law. The jury returned mixed verdicts. He was sentenced to decades in prison, including life for one of the murder counts.

After losing his appeal, the defendant filed a timely petition for post-conviction relief. He argued that his trial attorney failed him by not challenging the state’s timeline and by neglecting to question key witnesses. His attorney, he claimed, should not have moved forward with the mental health defense without thoroughly investigating the facts.

Continue reading →

Contact Information
Law Office of James Novak, PLLC
4500 S Lakeshore Dr #352
Tempe, AZ 85282
Phone: (480) 413-1499Text: (602) 908-8123

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2017 – 2026, The Law Office of James E. Novak
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design