State of Arizona, Appellee v. Sophia Leeann Richter, Appellant.

Summary

The Court held that an ongoing pattern of abuse and threats over several months can constitute a sufficiently immediate threat to support a duress defense, and that the defendant presented enough evidence to submit that defense to the jury. It also held that the trial court improperly treated duress evidence as prohibited diminished-capacity evidence, but upheld exclusion of the proposed expert testimony on the limited record because it did not qualify as permissible observation evidence. The Court reversed the convictions and sentences and remanded for a new trial. The partial dissent would have affirmed because the proffer did not show an immediate threat or the absence of reasonable legal alternatives.