Whether in the Phoenix area, or anywhere in Arizona, per A.R.S. §13-1803 "Unlawful Use of Means of Transportation" or "Joyriding/ Borrowing Without Permission", occurs when a person without the intent to "permanently" deprive, knowingly takes unauthorized control of another person's vehicle. This can also occur if the person is a passenger in a car and they know or have reason to know that the driver is in unlawful possession of that vehicle.
If the person is actually driving the vehicle, then they can be charged with a class (five) 5 felony. For a first offense class five (5) felony, carries the range of punishment from probation with zero (0) days in jail up to one (1) year in jail; or a range of prison of six (6) months to two and one half (2.5) years of incarceration. If a person has one (1) allegeable historical prior conviction, then the "prison only" range can be one (1) year to three and three quarter (3.75) years of incarceration. If the person has two (2) allegeable historical prior convictions, then the "prison only" range is three (3) years to seven and one half (7.5) years of incarceration.
If the person is merely a passenger in a car that is being unlawfully used, then they can be charged with a class six (6) felony. The range of punishment for a first offense is probation with zero (0) days in jail up to one (1) year in jail; or prison of four (4) months to two (2) years of incarceration. If the person has one (1) allegeable historical prior conviction, then the "prison only" range is nine (9) months to two and three quarter (2.75) years of incarceration. If the person has two (2) allegeable historical prior convictions, then the "prison only" range is two and one quarter (2.25) years to five and three quarter (5.75) years of incarceration.
One of the most often seen defenses to Unlawful Use of Means of Transportation / Joyriding is "Lack of Knowledge". For example, a group may pull up in a vehicle to pick-up a person, and that person may have no knowledge that the vehicle is actually stolen. In other words, if they assume the person driving it has permission to drive the vehicle, then they would not be guilty of being a passenger in a "known" illegally borrowed vehicle. This same scenario can occur when the person who has "borrowed" the car then asks another person to drive and states "this is my uncle's car, you drive". Again, if the Defendant did not have knowledge, then the Defendant is not illegally Joyriding. Remember, the Prosecutor can charge this crime even if this car is a relative's vehicle (such as an uncle) if that person did not give permission for the driver to take the car. It is important to interview all parties present in order to show that the Defendant did not actual have knowledge that the person who presented him with the car was doing so unlawfully.
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…
