Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Busso-Estopellan v. Hon. Mroz/state, Ariz. (2015)
Busso-Estopellan v. Hon. Mroz/state, Ariz. (2015)
BACKGROUND
2
The State indicted Jesus Busso-Estopellan in 2011 on two
counts of first degree murder and filed a notice of intent to seek the death
penalty. Less than a year later, Busso-Estopellans attorneys sent a letter to
the trial court judge stating that Mr. Busso-Estopellan has indicated that
he would accept a plea offer to natural life if it were offered to him. The
State did not extend a plea offer.
3
In 2014, Busso-Estopellan filed a motion in limine seeking
permission to introduce evidence of his willingness to accept a natural life
plea offer at the penalty phase of his trial if he is convicted and becomes
eligible for the death penalty. The trial court denied the motion and BussoEstopellans subsequent motion for reconsideration. The court reasoned
that Busso-Estopellans proposition did not relate to any aspect of his
character, evidenced only a desire to avoid the consequences of the death
penalty rather than a true acceptance of responsibility for his actions, or
remorse, and improperly asked the jury to speculate about why the State
had rejected the offer.
4
Busso-Estopellan sought special action relief from the court of
appeals, but that court summarily declined jurisdiction. We granted BussoEstopellans petition for review because it presents a recurring legal
question of statewide importance. We have jurisdiction pursuant to article
6, section 5 of the Arizona Constitution.
II.
DISCUSSION
2
CONCLUSION
12
A defendants pretrial offer to plead guilty in a capital case,
even with a sentencing condition, is relevant to whether he accepts
responsibility for his actions, a non-statutory mitigating circumstance.
Because the trial court ruled otherwise, we vacate its order denying BussoEstopellans motion to permit introduction of this evidence in the penalty
phase if he is convicted and becomes eligible for the death penalty.