Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

103 Ariz. 457

445 P.2d 433

State v. Stewart

Arizona Supreme Court

Decided September 25, 1968

Arizona Supreme Court · decided 1968-09-25

Relies on State Ex Rel. Ronan v. Stevens

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1968-09-25

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently February 1990

11 state decisions

501968197019801990decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

UDALL, Vice Chief Justice:

¶1 Appellant, hereinafter called “defendant”, plead guilty to a charge of robbery and was sentenced to serve fifteen to thirty years in the State Penitentiary. He appeals his conviction claiming that he was coerced into pleading guilty by the county attorney.

¶2 Defendant was charged in the information with robbery and assault with intent to murder. The information was amended and the assault charge dropped. Defendant then plead guilty to the robbery charge. Defendant now contends that he entered the guilty plea because the county attorney promised to reciprocate by having the assault charge dismissed. Defendant also contends that the assault charge was spurious and was included in the information merely to scare him into pleading guilty to robbery.

¶3*458 We do not agree that the assault charge was spurious. Probable cause was found for assault with intent to commit murder by an independent magistrate.

¶4 The prosecutor may use discretion in deciding which offenses he will prosecute. State ex rel. Ronan v. Stevens, 93 Ariz. 375, 381 P.2d 100 (1963). He must weigh the evidence, the law and the facts, and the chances of successful termination of the prosecution. In his discretion he may have the court dismiss prosecution of one offense upon the entry of a guilty plea to another.

¶5 In no case could we approve the filing of spurious charges against a defendant in order to coerce or “scare” him ■into pleading guilty to one of the charges. 'The record does not indicate that such is ■the case here.

¶6 Affirmed.

McFARLAND, C. J., and STRUCKMEYER, BERNSTEIN and LOCKWOOD, JJ., concur.
/103/ariz/457 · .json · Public domain