James v. State

── James v. State ── Court: Court of Appeals of Arizona Date: May 04, 2026 Category: General NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION. UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE. IN THE ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION ONE JOHN ASHLEY JAMES, Petitioner, v. STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent. No. 1 CA-SA 26-0072 FILED 05-04-2026 Petition for Special Action from the Superior Court in Mohave County No. CR2025-01035 The Honorable Derek C. Carlisle, Judge JURISDICTION ACCEPTED; RELIEF DENIED COUNSEL Mohave County Public Defender’s Office, Kingman By Paul Amann Counsel for Petitioner Center for Rural American Justice, Chandler By Celeste Robertson Counsel for Respondent  JAMES v. STATE Decision of the Court MEMORANDUM DECISION Presiding Judge David B. Gass delivered the decision of the court, in which Chief Judge Randall M. Howe and Judge Andrew J. Becke joined. G A S S, Judge: ¶1 Petitioner John Ashley James seeks special action review of the superior court’s dismissal of criminal charges against him without prejudice. James sought dismissal with prejudice because the State reindicted him on the same charges after the superior court had earlier found him not competent and not restorable (NCNR). Because James has no speedy and adequate remedy by appeal, the court accepts jurisdiction. Because the superior court did not abuse its discretion when it dismissed the charges without prejudice, the court denies relief. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY ¶2 In 2020, the State indicted James for murder and related charges. In 2024, the superior court found James was NCNR. The superior court then conducted a jury trial under A.R.S. § 13-4521. After the jury found James to be dangerous (beyond a reasonable doubt by a jury), the superior court committed James to a “Secure State Mental Health Facility” so he could “receive education, care, supervision, and treatment to render the defendant either competent or non-dangerous under A.R.S. § 13- 4521[.E].” ¶3 The problem, as the superior court recognized, is no such facility existed in Arizona at the time. The court affirmed the superior court’s Title 13 order, which “compels his placement in a secure state mental health facility when possible.” State v. James, No. 1 CA-CV 25-0192, 2026 WL 586095, at *3 ¶ 16, *8 ¶ 40 (Ariz. App. Mar. 3, 2026) (emphasis added). ¶4 Because no secure state mental health facility existed, the superior court civilly committed James to the Arizona State Hospital for treatment. In December 2025, while the above appeal was pending, the Hospital notified the State that it planned to discharge James because he would not benefit from ongoing treatment. The release notice did not say 2  JAMES v. STATE Decision of the Court whether James remained NCNR or dangerous. Based on the release notice, the State reindicted James for the same crimes as the 2020 indictment. ¶5 James moved to dismiss the new charges with prejudice. After a newly appointed prosecuting agency was appointed, the State moved to dismiss the charges without prejudice. The superior court heard from the parties, denied James’s motion, granted the State’s motion, and dismissed the charges without prejudice. James filed this special action asking the court to order the dismissal be with prejudice. SPECIAL ACTION JURISDICTION ¶6 James has no right to appeal the superior court’s granting of a motion to dismiss without prejudice.