HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014078.jpg

2014] CRIME VICTIMS’ RIGHTS 99 For example, Arizona has adopted a constitutional amendment and statutes that expansively protect victims. Under Arizona law, the definition of victim hinges on whether a criminal offense has been committed, and the term “criminal offense” is defined as “conduct that gives a peace officer or prosecutor probable cause to believe” a crime has occurred.”*’ In short, a victim’s status does not hinge on the formal filing of charges but rather on the criminal conduct itself. Arizona law enforcement personnel must give information to victims describing their rights as soon as possible, even if formal charges have not yet been filed, and a victim may request that the prosecutor discuss the disposition of the case, including “a decision not to proceed with a criminal prosecution, dismissal, plea, or sentence negotiations and pretrial diversion programs.”’” A victim may even pursue some rights if counts are dismissed.**° Arizona courts have also permitted victims to invoke their rights in the context of civil forfeiture proceedings,”*! Hawaii’s victims’ rights statute illustrates how a state has defined the term “case” more expansively than the limited definition advocated by the Department in order to facilitate victim participation. By statute in Hawaii, victims must, upon request, be informed of “major developments” in any felony case.’ Along a similar vein, the prosecuting attorney must consult or advise the victim about any plea negotiations.*** Interestingly, however, the Hawaii legislature defined “major developments” as “arrest or release of the suspect by the police, case deferral by the police, referral to the prosecutor by the police, rejection of the case by the prosecutor, preliminary hearing date, grand jury date, trial and sentencing dates, and the disposition of the case.”’** The usage of the term “case” and the plain language of the provisions demonstrate that victims in the State of Hawaii are entitled to a notification right and a possible consultation nght long before formal charges are filed. 27 Ariz. REV. STAT. ANN. § 13-4401(6) (2010) (emphasis added), see State ex rel. Thomas v. Klein, 150 P.3d 778, 780-81 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2007) (noting the original version defined a criminal offense as a violation of a statute). °°8 Under Arizona law, the “rights and duties that are established by this chapter arise on the arrest or formal charging of the person or persons who are alleged to be responsible for a criminal offence against a victim.” ARIz. REV. STAT. ANN. § 13-4402(A) (2010) (emphasis added). 29 Ariz. REV. STAT. ANN. § 13-4419(A) (2010). 230 See Ariz. REV. STAT. ANN. § 13-4402.01(A). °31 Tt appears, however, that the criminal proceeding may have been parallel to the civil forfeiture proceeding. See State v. Lee, 245 P.3d 919, 923-24 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2011). 232 Haw. Rev. Stat. ANN. § 801D-4(a)(1) (LexisNexis 2007). 733 See id. 234 Id. § 801D-2. HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014078