{"id":2913,"date":"2023-06-08T13:00:00","date_gmt":"2023-06-08T13:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/azexpunge.org\/?p=2913"},"modified":"2023-06-12T16:21:51","modified_gmt":"2023-06-12T16:21:51","slug":"arizona-court-of-appeals-decision-marijuana-sales-convictions-can-be-expunged-per-prop-207-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/azexpunge.org\/nv\/2023\/06\/08\/arizona-court-of-appeals-decision-marijuana-sales-convictions-can-be-expunged-per-prop-207-2\/","title":{"rendered":"AZ APPEALS COURT: Coconino County ‘Erred’ When It Deemed Marijuana Sales Offenses Ineligible For Expungement"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\n \t\n\t
\n\t \t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t \t \t
\n\t\t \n
\n
\n

FLAGSTAFF, ARIZONA\u2013JUNE 8, 2023\u2013<\/strong>Today, the Arizona Court of Appeals reiterated and affirmed its May 30 ruling in State v. Sorensen that the expungement statute codified into law by the passage of Proposition 207 in 2020 makes \u201csale-related marijuana offenses” eligible for expungement.<\/p> <\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n

\n
\n\t\u201cThe Court of Appeals has correctly interpreted the law, which will now allow many more people to benefit from the expungement process\u201d <\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n
\n
\n

As the Court stated in its ruling in State v. Pliego, via Presiding Judge Jennifer M. Perkins:<\/p> <\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n

\n
\n

“The State [represented by the Coconino County Attorney\u2019s Office] argued in its objection to [the appellant\u2019s] petition for expungement that ‘for sale offenses are not eligible for expungement.\u2019 This Court recently concluded that ‘for sale’ offenses are included within the expungement statute. <\/span>State v. Sorensen<\/span><\/i>, 1 CA-CR 21-0518, 2023 WL 3702761, at *3, \u00b6 12 (Ariz. App. May 30, 2023); A.R.S. \u00a7 36-2862(A)(1).<\/span><\/p>\n

Notably, in <\/span>Sorensen<\/span><\/i> the State agreed that the expungement statute applies to ‘sale-related <\/span>marijuana offenses.’ Id. at \u00b6 6. Although we are not ‘absolutely bound by prior Court of Appeals decisions, the principle of Stare decisis and the need for stability in the law’ requires us to consider this Court\u2019s previous decisions ‘as highly persuasive and binding, unless we are convinced that the prior decisions are based upon clearly erroneous principles, or conditions have changed so as to render these prior decisions inapplicable.’ <\/span>Castillo v. Indus<\/span><\/i>. Comm\u2019n, 21 Ariz. App. 465, 471 (1974).\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

We see no special reason that would warrant departure from <\/span>Sorensen<\/span><\/i>. Therefore, the superior court erred when it determined that marijuana sales offenses are per se ineligible for expungement.”<\/span><\/p> <\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n

\n
\n

The appellant in this case was successfully represented by Adam Cirzan of Flagstaff-based DNA People\u2019s Legal Services, a member organization of the statewide Reclaim Your Future campaign, the only state-funded marijuana expungement effort in Arizona.<\/p> <\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n

\n
\n

The 2020 passage of Prop 207 legalized adult recreational use of marijuana in Arizona and created a pathway to expungement. The Department of Health Services has since provided funding from marijuana sales to the Reclaim Your Future campaign for education and community outreach related to Prop 207.<\/p> <\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n

\n
\n

_________________<\/p> <\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n

\n
\n

The Reclaim Your Future campaign is organized by the Arizona Marijuana Expungement Coalition and is funded by <\/em>the Arizona Department of Health Services to help people seal their marijuana-related conviction histories. Our <\/em>Coalition is composed of community legal services and advocacy organizations from across Arizona.<\/em><\/p> <\/div>\n<\/div>\n\t <\/div>\n\t \t<\/div>\n\t\t <\/div>\n\t \n\t<\/div>\n\t\n\t<\/div>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

FLAGSTAFF, ARIZONA\u2013JUNE 8, 2023\u2013Today, the Arizona Court of Appeals reiterated and affirmed its May 30 ruling in State v. Sorensen that the expungement statute codified into law by the passage of Proposition 207 in 2020 makes \u201csale-related marijuana offenses\u201d eligible for expungement.<\/p>","protected":false},"author":7,"featured_media":2924,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_seopress_robots_primary_cat":"none","_seopress_titles_title":"","_seopress_titles_desc":"FLAGSTAFF, ARIZONA\u2013JUNE 8, 2023\u2013Today, the Arizona Court of Appeals reiterated and affirmed its May 30 ruling in State v. Sorensen that the expungement statute codified into law by the passage of Proposition 207 in 2020 makes \u201csale-related marijuana offenses\u201d eligible for expungement.","_seopress_robots_index":"","cybocfi_hide_featured_image":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[15,25,47],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2913","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-articles","category-blog","category-press-release","has-post-title","has-post-date","has-post-category","has-post-tag","has-post-comment","has-post-author",""," cat-15"," cat-25"," cat-47"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/azexpunge.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/february-2022-ak-leaf-garden-quintessence-farms-dsc2622-copy-2.jpg","builder_content":"

FLAGSTAFF, ARIZONA\u2013JUNE 8, 2023\u2013<\/strong>Today, the Arizona Court of Appeals reiterated and affirmed its May 30 ruling in State v. Sorensen that the expungement statute codified into law by the passage of Proposition 207 in 2020 makes \u201csale-related marijuana offenses\" eligible for expungement.<\/p>\n\u201cThe Court of Appeals has correctly interpreted the law, which will now allow many more people to benefit from the expungement process\u201d\n

As the Court stated in its ruling in State v. Pliego, via Presiding Judge Jennifer M. Perkins:<\/p>\n

\"The State [represented by the Coconino County Attorney\u2019s Office] argued in its objection to [the appellant\u2019s] petition for expungement that 'for sale offenses are not eligible for expungement.\u2019 This Court recently concluded that 'for sale' offenses are included within the expungement statute. State v. Sorensen<\/i>, 1 CA-CR 21-0518, 2023 WL 3702761, at *3, \u00b6 12 (Ariz. App. May 30, 2023); A.R.S. \u00a7 36-2862(A)(1).<\/p>

Notably, in Sorensen<\/i> the State agreed that the expungement statute applies to 'sale-related marijuana offenses.' Id. at \u00b6 6. Although we are not 'absolutely bound by prior Court of Appeals decisions, the principle of Stare decisis and the need for stability in the law' requires us to consider this Court\u2019s previous decisions 'as highly persuasive and binding, unless we are convinced that the prior decisions are based upon clearly erroneous principles, or conditions have changed so as to render these prior decisions inapplicable.' Castillo v. Indus<\/i>. Comm\u2019n, 21 Ariz. App. 465, 471 (1974).\u00a0<\/p>

We see no special reason that would warrant departure from Sorensen<\/i>. Therefore, the superior court erred when it determined that marijuana sales offenses are per se ineligible for expungement.\"<\/p>\n

The appellant in this case was successfully represented by Adam Cirzan of Flagstaff-based DNA People\u2019s Legal Services, a member organization of the statewide Reclaim Your Future campaign, the only state-funded marijuana expungement effort in Arizona.<\/p>\n

The 2020 passage of Prop 207 legalized adult recreational use of marijuana in Arizona and created a pathway to expungement. The Department of Health Services has since provided funding from marijuana sales to the Reclaim Your Future campaign for education and community outreach related to Prop 207.<\/p>\n

_________________<\/p>\n

The Reclaim Your Future campaign is organized by the Arizona Marijuana Expungement Coalition and is funded by <\/em>the Arizona Department of Health Services to help people seal their marijuana-related conviction histories. Our <\/em>Coalition is composed of community legal services and advocacy organizations from across Arizona.<\/em><\/p>","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/azexpunge.org\/nv\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2913","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/azexpunge.org\/nv\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/azexpunge.org\/nv\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/azexpunge.org\/nv\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/7"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/azexpunge.org\/nv\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2913"}],"version-history":[{"count":14,"href":"https:\/\/azexpunge.org\/nv\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2913\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2948,"href":"https:\/\/azexpunge.org\/nv\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2913\/revisions\/2948"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/azexpunge.org\/nv\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2924"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/azexpunge.org\/nv\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2913"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/azexpunge.org\/nv\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2913"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/azexpunge.org\/nv\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2913"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}