State of Arizona, Appellee v. Alan Matthew Champagne, Appellant.

Summary

The court affirmed Champagne’s convictions and death sentence, rejecting challenges concerning counsel substitution, jury instructions, undercover statements, cross-examination, mitigation evidence, victim-impact testimony, and Arizona’s capital-sentencing scheme. It held that the trial court adequately investigated the alleged attorney-client conflict, properly admitted or excluded the challenged evidence, correctly instructed the jury, and had sufficient evidence to sustain the aggravating circumstances and death sentence.