Joel Chorny on behalf of AACJ organized a subcommittee to explore the idea of bringing concerted efforts to increase applications for civil rights restoration throughout the state.  After getting in touch with Thomas Reardon with the Cochise County Reentry Coalition, the committee’s attention turned towards Cochise County.  After many months of planning, a restoration of rights workshop was held in Cochise County Superior Court in Sierra Vista on March 23.  It is estimated that about 40 members of the community attended and received assistance in filing their applications for restoration of their rights.  Three volunteers from Pima County assisted along with 4 volunteers from Cochise county, including member David Thorn who was instrumental in the process.

We hope this is only the beginning of a sea change in rural counties where rights restoration is so desperately needed, but up until now so rarely sought.

Thank you to all the volunteers and to AACJ for its support in these efforts.

See attached  Herald/Review Media article

http://www.myheraldreview.com/news/overwhelming-response-to-first-ever-civil-rights-restoration-clinic/article_628204fa-36f6-11e8-862f-a3c757b79059.html. 

The Ninth Circuit decided on October 15th that Arizona’s Prop 100, which makes arrestees non-bondable if they commit a “serious offense,” violates substantive due process. A panel of the Ninth Circuit decided last year by a 2-1 vote that it is OK – this time, the court en banc found it unconstitutional by a vote of 9-2.

In addition to the absolutely incredible work by the ACLU, AACJ filed an amicus brief (Kathy Brody, Mikel Steinfeld, Amy Kalman, and David Euchner) providing many of the details of how Prop 100 is implemented in our local courts. Although our brief is not cited in the opinion, I recognize many of the points made by Judge Fisher’s opinion as coming from our brief.

You can read the Ninth Circuit’s opinion here.

Arizona Daily Star recently included an op-ed by AACJ President David Euchner entitled “The Constitution is not a loophole.” This was written in response to an article published in the same paper on September 28th by the new courtroom beat reporter Patrick McNamara, “’Not competent’ loophole frees some offenders.” In short, McNamara’s article said that people are committing offenses, being found not restorable and having their cases dismissed, and then committing new offenses, and there is nothing we can do about it. As if that was not bad enough, the Southern Arizona criminal defense community was enraged at labeling a bedrock constitutional principle as a “loophole.”

You can read the op-ed online here.