Hyder v. Superior Court

617 P.2d 1152, 127 Ariz. 36, 1980 Ariz. LEXIS 274
Arizona Supreme Court·Decided September 24, 1980·No. No. 15041·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We accepted jurisdiction of a Petition for Special Action brought by the Maricopa County Attorney. Prior to trial, the Superior Court ruled that evidence of polygraph examinations given to defendant would, after proper foundation, be admitted in evidence. The County Attorney objected urging that polygraph results are admissible only if so stipulated by both parties, citing State of Arizona v. Treadaway, 116 Ariz. 163, 568 P.2d 1061 (1977). By this action the state sought relief from the court’s ruling. We agree with the position taken by the state.

Since this point was decided in State v. Valdez, 91 Ariz. 274, 371 P.2d 894 (1962), the Arizona Supreme Court has consistently taken the position that polygraph evidence is inadmissible except by stipulation. The trial court, in ruling to the contrary, exceeded its jurisdiction.

Counsel for the defendant urges that the court’s ruling was based on an attempt to rectify a situation where the County Attorney had misled the defendant regarding a plea agreement. Acceptance of jurisdiction in this action contains no implication as to our position on the plea negotiations or actions of the parties regarding a plea agreement.

Relief sought by petitioner granted. Remanded for further proceedings consistent herewith.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Hyder v. Superior Court, 617 P.2d 1152, 127 Ariz. 36, 1980 Ariz. LEXIS 274 (Ark. 1980).

617 P.2d 1152 (Hyder v. Superior Court) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Nicholaus C. v. Sarah C., I.C.
Court of Appeals of Arizona, 2016
Matter of Swartz
686 P.2d 1236 (Arizona Supreme Court, 1984)