Case Detail
CitationState v. Minnitt, 55 P.3d 774 (Ariz. 2002)
Pros. First NameKen
Pros. Last NamePeasley
Trial Year1993
BodySupreme court
OpinionArizona Supreme Court held that "Arizona's constitutional protection against double jeopardy should have barred [the defendant's] 1999 retrial because in both the 1993 and 1997 trials the prosecutor engaged in extreme misconduct that he knew was grossly improper and highly prejudicial, both as to the defendant and to the integrity of the system. Moreover, the trial judge found and the record substantiates that the prosecutor did so with knowing indifference to the danger of mistrial or reversal, if not a specific intent to cause a mistrial." The Court found: "The prosecutor knowingly and repeatedly misled the jury as to how, when, and from whom [detective witness] first learned the names of the three defendants. By allowing the jury to believe that [a different witness] was the initial source, the state avoided the credibility obstacle that would have been apparent had [the detective witness] himself been the source. It is clear that [this witness] testified falsely and that his testimony was used to bolster the credibility of the state's key witness. Moreover, the record establishes that [prosecutor] Peasley knew the testimony was false and not only failed to clarify the mistake but argued the evidentiary point to the jury. Peasley's calculated deception reveals the actual weakness of the state's case. His only explanation was that he forgot the correct sequence of events and that during the 1997 trial his health was poor."
Determination Year2002
Misconduct TypeT
C/S EffectDismissal
Pros. Misc. ReportedUKN
Sanction TypeUKN
Web link