State v. Robin
Cited by
- State v. Mekeel 561 P.3d 409 Ariz. Ct. App. 2024
- State of Arizona v. Samuel Wayne Swoopes Ariz. Ct. App. 2007
- State v. Whitley 85 P.3d 116 Ariz. Ct. App. 2004
- State v. Benenati 52 P.3d 804 Ariz. Ct. App. 2002
- Perez v. Community Hospital of Chandler, Inc. 929 P.2d 1303 Ariz. 1997
- State v. Rich 907 P.2d 1382 Ariz. 1995
- State v. Fletcher 717 P.2d 866 Ariz. 1986
- State v. McDaniel 665 P.2d 70 Ariz. 1983
- State v. Shumway 672 P.2d 944 Ariz. Ct. App. 1983
- State v. Hilliard 651 P.2d 892 Ariz. Ct. App. 1982
- State v. Benford 631 P.2d 1105 Ariz. Ct. App. 1981
- State v. Christensen 628 P.2d 580 Ariz. 1981
Authorities cited
Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.
- State v. Werring 523 P.2d 499
- State v. Burnetts 295 P.2d 377
Opinion text
HAYS, Justice. Robert Gonzales Robin was found guilty of first degree murder and was sentenced to life imprisonment. He now appeals and we have jurisdiction pursuant to Article 2, § 24 and Article 6, § 5 of the Arizona Constitution and A.R.S. § 12-120.21. We need only discuss one issue presented on appeal: whether it was error for the trial judge to have communicated with the jury in the absence of the defendant and counsel. We find that it was. The jury sent the judge questions which dealt with issues of fact and the judge answered from his notes and his recollection of the relevant testimony. It is improper for a trial judge in a criminal case to communicate with the jurors after they have retired to deliberate unless the defendant and counsel have been notified and given an opportunity to be present. State v. Werring, 111 Ariz. 68 , 523 P.2d 499 (1974); State v. Burnetts, 80 Ariz. 208 , 295 P.2d 377 (1956). Where the communication concerns the case and particularly issues of fact, the defendant is not required to show actual prejudice. State v. Burnetts, supra. The judgment is reversed and the case remanded for a new trial. *468 CAMERON, C. J., STRUCKMEYER, V. C. J., and SANDRA D. O’CONNOR, Superior Court Judge, Maricopa County, and WILLIAM W. NABOURS, Superior Court Judge, Yuma County, concur. Note: Justice LOCKWOOD, retired, and Justice HOLOHAN did not participate in the determination of this matter. SANDRA D. O’CONNOR, Judge of the Superior Court of Maricopa County, and WILLIAM W. NABOURS, Judge of the Superior Court of Yuma County, sat in their stead.