Cited by

¶ 8 (App. 2011) (“A challenge to the denial of a motion for remand generally must be made by special action before trial, and is not reviewable on direct appeal.” ( ¶ 9 (App. 2009))).

§ 13-411 because it “could conceivably lead the grand jury to eschew an indictment”); ¶ 16 (App. 2009) (discussing prosecutor’s duty to instruct grand jury on relevant defense of entrapment).

-41 (App. 1991); -27 ¶¶ 12-16 (App. 2009) (discussing prosecutor’s duty to instruct grand jury on relevant defense of entrapment).

“In reviewing a trial judge’s order within the context of a special action, ordinarily we must find the judge abused his discretion or exceeded his jurisdiction or legal authority before we may grant relief.” ¶ 10 , (quotation omitted); see also Ariz. R.P.

Because denial of a motion for remand is not subject to review on direct appeal, ¶ 9, in an exercise of our discretion, we accept special action jurisdiction.

“A challenge to the denial of a motion for remand generally must be made by special action before trial, and is not reviewable on direct appeal.” ¶ 9

439-40 ¶ 31, -35 (2004); , 426 ¶ 9

¶ 8 “A challenge to the denial of a motion for remand generally must be made by special action before trial, and is not reviewable on direct appeal.” ¶ 9

(listing likely recurrence of issue among reasons for accepting special action jurisdiction).

(listing likely recurrence of issue among reasons for accepting special action jurisdiction).