Friday, August 18, 2023

UPDATE: Arizona Supreme Court SWIFTLY DISMISSES Heath/Crosby/Mast Special Action/Election De-Certification (READ Order)

UPDATE, 8/25: "UPDATE: Arizona Supreme Court SWIFTLY DISMISSES Heath/Crosby/Mast  Special Action/Election De-Certification (READ Order)"

That was quick. The Arizona Supreme Court swiftly dismissed attorney Ryan Heath's Special Action Petition attempting to decertify Arizona's 2022 election results.

Heath, on behalf of Cochise County Supervisor Tom Crosby and one other, filed the action directly with the Supreme Court last Friday. The four (of seven) Justices who considered the matter did not need to ask for the defendants to file a response to decide to deny the Petition for at least three reasons:

1) It was an improper "collateral appeal" of Judge Peter Thompson's decision in Kari Lake's Election Contest that the signature verification statutes were complied with in 2022;

2) The requested mandamus order (to de-certify or re-do the election) is not appropriate for a Special Action when there are disputed facts; and 

3) Heath did not give a compelling reason why he had to file directly with the Supreme Court, as required.

Original article, 8/18: "NEW: De-certify the 2022 Arizona Election, New Special Action Petition Asks Arizona Supreme Court (READ Petition)"

A new Special Action Petition filed yesterday asks the Arizona Supreme Court to "de-certify" the 2022 election results because Maricopa County did not properly verify signatures on early ballots.

Attorney Ryan Heath - who attempted to insert himself into previous Election Contest appeals - claims that the state's largest county violated the law when it used multiple signatures from the voter's records to validate the signature on 2022's ballot envelope affidavit, thereby allowing the possibility that results improperly weighted the (Democratic-leaning) early vote.

Similar arguments have already failed at the trial court level in Kari Lake's Election Contest, and is currently in the appellate process. And, this Special Action Petition is separate from the possible class action lawsuit that Heath has been advertising.

The Supreme Court has discretion on whether or not to accept this Petition. If the Justices decide that it should have been filed either in Superior Court of the Court of Appeals, they "will on that ground" simply dismiss it.

Chandler attorney Tom Ryan also pointed out that "This is an election contest under Title 16. I don’t care that it is now styled as a “special action.” It should be deader than a doornail dead with the Az Supreme Court as beyond the statutory time limits for filing election contests. No matter how much one tries to polish a cow pie, you’re never gonna make it shine. Something young Mr. Heath has not yet learned."

(Later,) asked for his response to the criticism that the Petition is a thinly-disguised Election Contest, Heath told Arizona's Law that "I'd say that the crux of the argument is constitutional in nature, it's supported by caselaw, and that the evidence supporting this claim was withheld by Maricopa County until recently."

(Correction: The Special Action Petition was filed yesterday, not today.)

This article was reported by AZ Law founder Paul Weich. 

"AZ Law" includes articles, commentaries and updates about opinions from the Arizona Supreme Court, U.S. Supreme Court, as well as trial and appellate courts, etc. AZ Law is founded by Phoenix attorney Paul Weich, and joins Arizona's Politics on the internet. 

AZ Law airs on non-profit Sun Sounds of Arizona, a statewide reading service that provides audio access to printed material for people who cannot hold or read print material due to a disability. If you know someone who could benefit from this 24/7 service, please let them know about member-supported Sun Sounds. And, YOU can donate or listen here. 

Previous episodes of AZ Law can be streamed or downloaded here, or wherever you get your podcasts.

3 comments:

  1. Maybe this one will earn Heath the sanctions he so richly deserves. This one has frivolous written all over it.

    ReplyDelete
  2. To paraphrase Saint Mugatu: it’s all the same case, for Christ's sake! Stand alone? Tacked onto the Lake case? Silly Special Action? They're the same case! Doesn't anybody notice this? I feel like I'm taking crazy pills! As it says in Proverbs, as the canine returns to its vomit, so the ignoramus refiles his ignominious entreaty. Pity.

    ReplyDelete

BREAKING: AZGOP Asks U.S. Supreme Court To Accept Kari Lake/Mark Finchem Appeal; Repeats Attacks On Dominion Voting Machines (READ Amicus)

The Gina Swoboda-led Arizona Republican Party today asked the U.S. Supreme Court to accept Kari Lake and Mark Finchem's appeal to revive...