Free Motion for Certificate of Appealability - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

Case 2:03-cv—02599-I\/IHI\/I Document 20-2 Filed 12/12/2005 Page 1 013

_ OFFICE OF THE PUBLIC DEFENDER »
MARICOPA COUNTY
` ]AMES j. HAAS 4
mmm D. Mussmim » Publ"`: Dcfcnda cuartrxssag
spscai Assistant appease Digtet0eCb1ef‘ e .
December 15, 2003 i L
Nr. john Richmd Tacquard, #071238 · S
Arizona State Prison Complex t
_ E'uma~4Cheyenne Unit _ I p _ _ _ `» p
P. O. Box 13006. ' » ` T _ 4 _
Yuma, Arizona 85366-3006 S ( ` _ p- W
RE; (State of Arizona v. john Richard Taequard S _ ( _ _
Arizona Supreme Court No. CR-03-0236. S
Arizona Court of Appeals No. 1-_ CA-CR 01,~0B66 r . i
Maricopa County Superior Court No. CR—2000#0l2158 . · _ ‘ P
Dear Tacquard: P p ` I P I i
Please be advisedirhat on November 25, 2003, the Arizona Supreme Court denied the relief requested
in your Petition for Review. I have enclosed a copy of the decisior1,re£lectin — this action for your
records. ( . p .
This decision b the Su reme Court exhausts our State court remedies; however, you are free to
i pursue further remedies thropgh the federal courts. we are closing our file in this case. We have
previously forwarded to you the complete record on appealincluding the reporter's transcripts. . ·
Very truly yours, .
Maxicopa County Public Defender I
Deputy Public Defender _
/1h i` ( T
Enclosure
LAW FJRM i
411 NORTH CENTRAL, SUITE 67 0 • Pnoemx, ARIZONA 85004
i (602) 506-8220 • FAX (602) 506-3238 • TT (602) 506-1646
@889 2¤O3·CV·O259@aMJ@'MigAD@HUm9P¥&0:s% OfJEllaQf&/MQ/2005 PGQG 2 0* 3

W,»»» · IQ iiiiiti ..
JAMES J. HAAS ·’‘' __..-· ‘ ‘` ' JEREMY n.MnssMAN
Public Defender lr, (*' sl Special Assistant
·l_ - _¤ PAUL .1. PRATO
"·._ _``··-- Appellate Division Chief
..___ __p,4i.
Office of the Public Defender
(602) 506-0898
July 26, 2002
Mr. John R. Tacquard, #071238
Arizona State Prison
Yuma - Cheyenne Unit
P.O. Box 13006 e
Yuma, Arizona 85366-3006
RE: State of Arizona v. John Richard Tacquard
Arizona Court of Appeals No. 1 CA-CR 01-0866
Maricopa County Superior Court No. CR 2000-012158
Dear Mr. Tacquard:
A short note regarding the opening brief I tiled on your behalf
Regretfully, I could not raise a pre-indictment delay/loss of the 911-tape evidence as a
claim in yom direct appeal. To be guite frank, however, if the 911 tape had been preserved it
may very well have been more prejudicial to you than its absence was. But, since the pre-
indictment delay issue was not raised in the trial court it could not be raised for the first time on
direct appeal.
Prior to tiling the opening brief, I discussed the issues with other attorneys in the
appellate division. Most felt, as I do, that the jury instruction issue and failure to grant a short
continuance issue are much better issues than the unlawful pat-down issue. Hopefully the Court
of Appeals will agree with us on one of the three.
Sincerely,
Maricopa County Public Defender
CHARLES R. KRULL
Deputy Public Defender
CRK;s‘of
LAW FIRM
411 North Central, Suite 670 • Phoenix, Arizona 85004
Case 2:O3—cv—O259E`t6M[•-Iw6-822]c111H‘mlér¤0H€B28 • (Fllenvd-26442/2005 Page 3 of 3

Case 2:03-cv-02599-MHM

Document 20-2

Filed 12/12/2005

Page 1 of 3

Case 2:03-cv-02599-MHM

Document 20-2

Filed 12/12/2005

Page 2 of 3

Case 2:03-cv-02599-MHM

Document 20-2

Filed 12/12/2005

Page 3 of 3