Legal Issue: Arizona "Boot strapping" prostitution into criminal enterprise felony charges - Massage case motion etc.
As most folks know I have been following the many escort, massage, studio and temple felony cases in Maricopa County Superior Court with detailed reports you know where. There are now major motions before the Court in many of the cases. I'm looking for any that win dismissal or not guilty verdicts at trial.
The Temple case is now on the 3rd judge and 3rd prosecutor in over 2 years and other cases are before other judges in Superior Court where all the felony cases are tried.
Many of the 2012 cases are getting close to trial probably in early 2014, for those that have not yet pled.
Sadly many have pled to felonies but with 1-2 years probation instead of risking 10+ years in prison possible, as the State Attorney threatens if reject plea agreements and found guilty at trial. In one case potential of 40+ years in prison for Temple defendant's with no evidence of any prostitution by her - only association with a criminal enterprise (Temple, Studio, Massage parlor, or where escort has driver, appointment taker - any situation of more than one person). The long prison threats are due to layering of multiple felony charges especially money laundering for every money transaction found.
Iroically the founder of the Temple was offerred a plea deal for time served but she rejected it determined to win her case at trial. Yet other "just workers" have to decide to be probably life long felons if take a plea or fight on vs a felony plea with 1-2 yrs probation.
While I've read many good motions in various cases one in a massage case directly attacks how what should be a simple misdemeanor prostitution charge has been elevated to a serious criminal enterprise felony (aka "racketeering") in AZ
Defendant #8 (initials HM) has a particularly interesting motion to dismiss and points of law. Her motion to dismiss at this stage was rejected but left as a trial issue per Judge Reinstein. This is from the China Day Foot Spa and Massage, AZ Massage and Greenway Massage case - CR2012-147073 and the full motion with the legal arguments is in the publc record.
Ruling that has possible defense argument left as a trial issue - arguing the indictment should have only been for prostitution not "racketeering" since prostitution not qualified predicate offense since only a misdemeanor. (HM) further argues the State can not "boot strap" the misdemeanor prostitution charge into charge required under racketeering.
The State contends that the Defendant was involved in a “criminal enterprise” in that she was employed in a house of prostitution that provided her with the accoutrements that allowed her to ply her trade. The State maintains that the massage parlor where the Defendant was arrested supplied her with massage tables, towels, etc., and paid the rent for the space that housed the massage parlor.
The State maintains that, the Defendant was paid by the owner/operator of this establishment at the end of the day depending on the services that she had rendered. Consequently, the State argues, the Defendant is more than a mere “street” prostitute and independent contractor (i.e. associated with a criminal enterprise)
The Court finds that there is a factual dispute as far as what the Defendant’s participation in the enterprise. Therefore, the Court will deny the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss with leave for the Defendant to re-urge the motion at the close of the State’s case. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED denying without prejudice the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss
