State v. Thompson
27 P.3d 796, 352 Ariz. Adv. Rep. 3, 200 Ariz. 439 (2001)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A prior offense qualifies as an "historical prior felony conviction" for sentence enhancement purposes if the prior offense was committed before the present offense, and the conviction for the prior offense occurred before the conviction for the present offense. A conviction occurs upon the determination of guilt, such as a guilty plea or jury verdict, not at sentencing.
Facts:
- Arthur Leon Thompson committed two drug-related felonies on July 8, 1997, and December 19, 1997.
- On December 30, 1997, Thompson committed the separate offense of theft.
- In May 1998, Thompson pled guilty to the two drug offenses.
- After pleading guilty, Thompson absconded before he could be sentenced for the drug offenses.
- Thompson was taken into custody in September 1998.
Procedural Posture:
- A jury in the superior court (trial court) found Arthur Leon Thompson guilty of theft.
- At a consolidated sentencing hearing for the theft and two prior drug offenses, the trial court applied the harsher sentence enhancement of A.R.S. § 13-604 and sentenced Thompson to three years in prison for the theft.
- Thompson, as appellant, appealed to the Arizona Court of Appeals (intermediate appellate court), arguing the trial court used the wrong enhancement statute.
- The Court of Appeals agreed with Thompson and remanded the case to the trial court for resentencing.
- The State of Arizona, as petitioner, sought review from the Arizona Supreme Court (highest court), which granted the petition.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a prior felony qualify as an "historical prior felony conviction" under A.R.S. § 13-604 for sentence enhancement when the defendant committed the present offense before being convicted of the prior felony, but was convicted of the prior felony before being convicted of the present offense?
Opinions:
Majority - Martone, Justice
Yes. A prior felony qualifies as an "historical prior felony conviction" under these circumstances because the statute's requirements are met when the prior offense predates the present offense and the prior conviction predates the present conviction. The court reasoned that the plain language of A.R.S. § 13-604(V)(1)(c) only requires that the commission of the prior offense precede the commission of the present offense. The term "prior felony conviction" logically implies that the conviction for the prior offense must also precede the conviction for the present offense. Citing State v. Walden, the court affirmed that a "conviction" occurs at the determination of guilt—either by plea or verdict—and not at the time of sentencing. In this case, Thompson committed the drug offenses before the theft, and his conviction for the drug offenses (May 1998 plea) occurred before his conviction for theft (December 1998 verdict), satisfying both conditions for enhancement under § 13-604.
Analysis:
This decision clarifies the temporal requirements for Arizona's sentence enhancement scheme, establishing a clear two-part test for what constitutes an "historical prior felony conviction." By defining "conviction" as the moment of guilt determination, the ruling prevents defendants from avoiding harsher penalties simply because their sentencing for a prior crime was delayed past the commission of a new one. This precedent solidifies a strict, textualist interpretation of the statute, prioritizing the sequence of offenses and convictions over the sequence of offenses and sentencing, thereby impacting how prosecutors charge and how courts sentence repeat offenders.
Unlock the full brief for State v. Thompson