Whether in the Phoenix area, or anywhere in Arizona, per A.R.S. §13-1804 "Extortion" occurs when a person commits Theft by "knowingly" obtaining or seeking to obtain property or services by means of a threat to take future action which includes: causing physical injury by means of a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument; causing physical injury in some other manner; causing damage to property; engaging in other conduct constituting a criminal offense; accusing someone of a crime or bringing criminal charges against anyone; exposing a secret or asserted fact (whether true or false) tending to subject anyone to hatred, contempt or ridicule or to impair the person's credit or business; taking or withholding action as a public servant or cause a public servant to take or withhold action; or causing anyone to part with any property. Clearly, there are some obvious statutory defenses which will be detailed in the "Possible Defenses" section.
If the Extortion occurs when somebody threatens to use or causes physical injury while using a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument (i.e., an "Allegation of dangerousness"), then this is a class two (2) felony. If the person actually used a deadly weapon in the victim's presence (either pointing it at them or discharging it or stabbing someone), then they are facing a "dangerous offense" which carries "prison only" punishment. The mandatory minimum for a first offense is seven (7) years incarceration; the presumptive is ten and one half (10.5) years incarceration; and the maximum is twenty-one (21) years of incarceration. If the person has one (1) historical allegeable dangerous prior conviction, then the "prison only" range is fourteen (14) years minimum, fifteen and three quarters (15.75) years presumptive; and twenty-eight (28) years of prison maximum. If the person has two (2) historical allegeable dangerous prior convictions, then the minimum is twenty-one (21) years of prison; the presumptive is twenty-eight (28) years; and the maximum is thirty-five (35) years of incarceration.
If the person only threatened to use the deadly weapon and did not actually display it (such as threatening over the phone), then the first offense punishment is anywhere from probation with zero (0) days in jail up to one (1) year in jail; or prison of three (3) years to twelve and one half (12.5) years of incarceration. If the person has one (1) historical allegeable prior conviction, then the "prison only" range is four and one half (4.5) years to twenty-three and one quarter (23.25) years of incarceration. If the person has two (2) historical allegeable prior convictions, then the "prison only" range is ten and one half (10.5) years to thirty-five (35) years of incarceration.
For all other situations, this will be charged as a class four (4) felony. A first offense punishment on a class four (4) felony is anywhere from probation with zero (0) days in jail up to one (1) year in jail; or prison of one (1) year to three and three quarters (3.75) years of incarceration. If the person has one (1) historical allegeable prior conviction, then the "prison only" range is two and one quarter (2.25) years to seven and one half (7.5) years of incarceration. If the person has two (2) historical allegeable prior convictions, then the "prison only" range is six (6) years to fifteen (15) years of incarceration.
By statute, it is specifically a defense that if a threat was made in order to obtain the property, and if that threat was "a lawful claim" as either restitution or indemnification for harm done under circumstances to which the accusation, exposure, lawsuit, or other official action relates, then this is permissible. Also, it is a defense when the threat of action was for compensation for property that was lawfully obtained or for lawful services. In other words, you can expose somebody for a crime, some other type of unethical business behavior, or withhold action as a public servant or cause a public servant to take action if you are asserting a "lawful claim". For example, if your neighbor was not returning your lawnmower and you told him that you would call the police and have him charged with a crime unless they promptly return the lawnmower, you would not be charged with Extortion. It is important to analyze all aspects of the alleged Extortion claim to show that somebody was acting within their rights in order to "lawfully obtain" their own property.
The "Common Defenses", which may apply in any criminal case are numerous and diverse. One of the most common defenses we encounter is a "Miranda Rights Violation". In Arizona, the standard of whether any inculpatory statement (i.e., a statement which tends to admit guilt) is admissible into evidence is based upon a "Voluntariness" standard. If we can demonstrate that the police coerced you (i.e., intimidated or tricked you) into making a confession or inculpatory statement, or that they did not properly read you your Miranda Rights, then we can suppress those statements and any evidence gathered as a direct result of those statements. In addition, "Denial of Right to Counsel" is another common defense which is often raised. This occurs when a suspect is in custody and requests to speak to their lawyer, but is denied and questioning continues. In certain cases (such as DUI) it is mandatory that you speak to an attorney as soon as possible in order to determine your rights before your body burns away the evidence of your presumably low alcohol content. Other defenses include challenging the validity of any search warrant, or whether there were any "forensic flaws" during the investigation of your case. This could include exposing flawed procedures regarding blood, breath, and urine testing; fingerprints analysis; DNA testing; ballistics; gunshot residue testing; computer analysis / "cloning hard drive" procedures; forensic financial accounting reviews; etc. Lastly, one of the most common defenses is exposing sloppy or misleading police reports which include everything from misstatements, false statements, flawed photo line-ups and inaccurate crime scene reconstruction.
It is important to hire an AV® rated law firm (the highest possible rating by Martindale Hubbell®), with the most Certified Criminal Law Specialists of any AV® rated Arizona Law Firm, per the Arizona Board of Legal Specialization. In addition, the Firm and all of it's lawyers are listed in the Bar Register of Preeminent Lawyers®. At the Law Offices of David Michael Cantor, P.C., the majority of our Attorneys are ex-Prosecutors, and all of our Attorneys know the system well. For a free initial consultation, call us at 1-888-822-6867, or click here to contact us now.
If your case involves Accident & Injury, Family & Divorce or Motorcycle Injury please visit our companion firm: Cantor Simon Law Group - www.cantorsimonlawgroup.com/
1-888-8CANTOR 480-858-0808
602-307-0808 623-877-8509
Calls are answered 24 hours a day
Broadway Road & 101 Freeway
2141 E. Broadway Road, Suite 220
Tempe, Arizona 85282
Not GuiltyComplete Acquittal |
04/03/09 |
Extreme DWI, DUI, and DWI |
Not GuiltyComplete Acquittal |
03/19/09 |
Felony Animal Cruelty |
Not GuiltyComplete Acquittal |
01/26/09 |
DUI and DWI |
Not GuiltyComplete Acquittal |
12/18/08 |
Extreme DWI, DUI, and DWI |
Not GuiltyComplete Acquittal |
09/16/08 |
Burglary, Possession of Burglary Tools, Criminal Damage |
Our most recent successes of more than 200 victories.
November 09, 2008
A dozen years ago, 3,000 drunken-driving prosecutions in Tucson…
