You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

State v. Cory

Citations: 749 P.2d 936; 156 Ariz. 27Docket: 2 CA-CR 87-0454

Court: Court of Appeals of Arizona; January 20, 1988; Arizona; State Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

Franklin Daniel Cory appealed a court decision following a guilty plea to attempted sexual assault, arguing that a condition of his probation requiring him to register as a sex offender under A.R.S. 13-3821 was improperly imposed. Cory contended that the statute applies only to individuals convicted of substantive offenses, not attempts. However, the court noted that Cory's plea agreement included violations of A.R.S. 13-1001, which must be associated with a substantive offense under Chapter 14. The court emphasized that the registration requirement serves its purpose by including those convicted of preparatory offenses. As Cory was indeed convicted under Chapter 14, the court found that the probation condition was valid and within the trial court's jurisdiction. The appeal was affirmed.

Legal Issues Addressed

Application of Sex Offender Registration Requirement

Application: The court applied the sex offender registration requirement to an individual convicted of an attempted offense, finding it valid as the statute encompasses preparatory offenses related to substantive crimes under Chapter 14.

Reasoning: The court emphasized that the registration requirement serves its purpose by including those convicted of preparatory offenses.

Interpretation of A.R.S. 13-3821

Application: The court interpreted A.R.S. 13-3821 to apply not only to substantive offenses but also to attempts, as long as the attempt is associated with a substantive offense under Chapter 14, thereby affirming the requirement for Cory to register as a sex offender.

Reasoning: Cory contended that the statute applies only to individuals convicted of substantive offenses, not attempts. However, the court noted that Cory's plea agreement included violations of A.R.S. 13-1001, which must be associated with a substantive offense under Chapter 14.

Validity of Probation Conditions

Application: The court found that imposing a probation condition requiring sex offender registration was within its jurisdiction and properly applied to Cory, given his conviction under Chapter 14.

Reasoning: As Cory was indeed convicted under Chapter 14, the court found that the probation condition was valid and within the trial court's jurisdiction.