Judge Darrow's empty courtroom.
Total Number of Documents as of 2/22/10:
58
Although James Ray's day in court inches closer, there are many legal hurdles and hearings to overcome before that day finally arrives. As a matter of fact, the paperwork and ensuing requests for copies became so overwhelming that the Clerk of the Superior Court in Yavapai County, Jeanne Hicks, issued a press release stating that a link has been added to the Clerk's website for the media and public to easily access documents filed in high profile cases.
{sidebar id=107}
Hicks explained in her press release, "The need for such a website quickly became evident when the various news agencies began contacting her offices for information and copies of documents in the State vs. James Arthur Ray case filed earlier this week.
"Ms. Hicks’ staff worked with the IT staff of the Administrative Office of the Courts of the Supreme Court of Arizona and the MIS staff of Yavapai County to develop the link. As documents are filed, clerk staff will upload them into the site enabling the media and the public to view and print documents from their own computers."
While this new page is enormously helpful, there are so many documents flying back and forth between attorneys and judges that it is easy to get overwhelmed quickly.
Here's a summary of the current proceedings and where things stand at this point, including links to all documents since February 9, 2010:
Regarding Bail, Currently Set at $5 million
Originally, the Motion for an Expedited Hearing on Reduced Bail was supposed to be heard on February 12 before Judge Darrow. Bail Hearing Request
When the Gag Order schedule was set, the expedited bail hearing was set aside. See: 2/9/10 Amended Notice of Hearing/Oral Argument
February 10, 2010, the Defense has requested again that there be a hearing on Friday, February 12, 2010 regarding release conditions. Judge Darrow orders that the regular briefing schedule be followed. Specifically, "The Court will not hear the issue of release modification at the hearing set for this Friday." (referring to 2/12/10) See: Status Conference
Hearing on bail set for Febraury 23, 2010 at 3:00 pm, allotting 2 hours. See Order Setting Hearing
On February 12, 2010 the State requested permission to file a response to reduced bail under seal, since much of what was being discussed was sealed by the court. After that, six other documents were filed by both parties that were sealed by the court. That order was granted by the Judge and filed on February 17.
The State also made a 6 page Motion to Strike an ex parte communication from Luis Li that had partly to do with attorney billing records. The State's argument, in part, is that Attorney Billing records are not covered by the attorney-client privilege.
A telephonic hearing was set up for the purpose of discussing a negotiated deal, but that deal was not completed due to Ray's inability to satisfy the jail bondsmen, according to Defense Attorney Tom Kelly. Of interest, however, was the fact that attorneys for the family of James Shore requested permission to take part in the telephonic hearing and also to be notified of all future hearings, trials and sentencing procedures.
Gag Order
The State requested that the Judge impose a gag order on all parties associated with the case. This hearing was set for Friday, February 12, with responses due February 10, 2010. See:2/9/10 Amended Notice of Hearing/Oral Argument
On February 9, 2010, KPNX Broadcasting Co. and Phoenix Newspapers, Inc. requested the opportunity to oppose the gag order request. See: Application from KPNX, Phx. Newspapers
On February 11, 2010, the Defense files an Opposition to State's Request for order directing all parties to refrain from extra-judicial comments "gag order". See Opposition Memorandum
Also on February 11, 2010, the State responds to the KPNX application. (It also has further responses, but the documentation is not complete.) See: Response to KPNX
February 12, 2010, Defense attorneys files a Further Response to "correct a serious legal error in the State's Reply to Defendant's Opposition Re: Request to REstrain Extra-Judicial Statements." (only page 1 is included) See Further Response
February 12, 2010 - Hearing held at 3:00 pm. (See Prescott eNews article: Gag Order Hearing held in Ray Case)
Cameras In the Courtroom
February 11, the State responds to requests by media for cameras in the courtroom for the February 12 hearing. See State Response to Cameras (only has page 1)
February 12, 2010 (this document wasn't posted until February 16): KTVK-TV has filed a motion to participate in the discussion regarding cameras in the courtroom. See: KTVK-TV Motion
On February 19, the State filed a 7 page Objection to cameras in the courtroom at 10:34 am.
Other parties also weighed in, notably attorneys for the Arizona Republic and KPNX Broadcasting, who made a Motion for Camera Coverage. They also filed statements by Michael Meister, Director of Photography and Video for the Arizona Republic and Jerome Parra, Assistant News Director for KPNX.
By 4:28 pm, the State agreed to have still cameras, but remained opposed to video cameras. Several conditions were noted, however, probably the most prominent being that Ray would be unrestrained and dressed in civilian clothing, and not shackles and jail garb. The State also asked for a "hearing-by-hearing" decision to be conducted.
By 4:55, the defense responded with a few stipulations of their own.
Long and short, it looks likely that at least one still camera will be allowed, and Ray will be in street clothing for the hearing.
Judge Warren R. Darrow Assigned to the James Arthur Ray Case
Top Yavapai Superior Court Judge Robert M. Brutinel assigns the State vs. James Arthur Ray case to Judge Warren R. Darrowfor "all further proceedings". See Reassignment of Judge
Early Disposition Court Hearing Vacated; Case Management Conference Set
On February 9, the Early Disposition Court hearing for February 11 was vacated. A Case Management Conference was set for March 15, 2010 at 9 am. See: Order Vacating EDC, Setting Case Management and Rule 12.10(a)5.8 Notice
Associate Counsel
A motion was made that the following attorneys be granted Associate Counsel Pro Hac Viec
All were granted.
Initial Evidence Disclosure Statement
The State files its Initial Disclosure Statement regarding evidence provided to Defendant (See: Initial Disclosure Statement). This is the material and information was provided:
- Department Report and Supplements 1-129
- Property and Evidence Reports
- Names and Addresses of experts who have examined any evidence in this case
- Dr. Robert E. Lyon, Yavapai County Medical Examiner's Office, 980 Division St., Prescott AZ
- Autopsy on James Shore, Autopsy Report on Kirby Brown
- Dr. A. L. Mosley, Coconino County Medical Examiner's Office, 2500 N. Fort Valley Rd, Flagstaff, AZ
- Autopsy on Elizabeth Neuman
Charges
On February 16, the State filed a Allegation of Aggravating Circumstances, which will be used in determining sentencing, should Ray be found guilty. According to Defense Attorney Tom Kelly, and Justia.com, Aggravating circumstances must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
Read all about Aggravating and Mitigating Circumstances at Justia.com.
James Ray Defense Attorneys
On February 10, 2010, at 4:41 pm, Judge Darrow grants a request to allow Attorneys Luis Li and Truc Do permission to make temporary appearances in behalf of James Arthur Ray.
See: Status Conference
Request for Ruling Regarding Public Records Request
February 12, 2010: Evidently, some media outlet put in a Public Records Request for Ray's phone calls while incarcerated. The State's position is that such telephone calls are not public records under the Arizona Public Records Law. See State's Request for Court Determination
February 12, 2010: The State is also asking for a determination as to whether the autopsy reports and photographs of the autopsies of the three deceased victims is subject to the Public Records requests. The State's position is that only limited information should be disclosed, and the privacy interests of the families should have a higher priority than public interest in disclosure. See State's Request for Court Determination for Review of Autopsy Report
Sealed Documents
Several documents have been posted that are sealed - in other words, when you try to open them, you just see a title stating:
"SEALED DOCUMENT: PURGED FROM THE FILE," and, "The sealed materials may only be disclosed to: Persons authorized by a Court order."
These documents include most of the ones regarding reduced bail, and also documents pertaining to the Grand Jury proceedings and minutes.
RSS Feed
Facebook
Twitter
