Katie Hobbs guilty of class 6 felony in violation of statute 38-503 B Conflict of interest, AZ 38-510 Penalties, “found guilty of an offense described….in this section shall forfeit his public office"
Katie Hobbs guilty of class 6 felony in violation of statute 38-503 B Conflict of interest, AZ 38-510 Penalties, “found guilty of an offense described….in this section shall forfeit his public office"
Katie Hobbs guilty of class 6 felony in violation of statute 38-503 B Conflict of interest, AZ 38-510 Penalties, “found guilty of an offense described....in this section shall forfeit his public office”
Katie Hobbs has been theatening folks with class 6 felony charges if they did not comply with her wishes.
From CNN.
“The Arizona Secretary of State’s Office on Friday asked state and local prosecutors to investigate and take enforcement action against two Republican officials who had balked at certifying their county’s election results by the legal deadline.
In the referral letter, State Elections Director Kori Lorick said Cochise County Supervisors Tom Crosby and Peggy Judd “knew they had a statutory requirement to canvass the election by November 28, but instead chose to act in violation of the law, putting false election narratives ahead of Cochise County’s voters.””
“Lorick’s letter cites three state laws that establish criminal penalties for “failing to perform an election duty.” Two are misdemeanors and one is a Class 6 felony, the least serious felony classification in the state.”
Well it turns out that the Arizona statute 38-503 B Conflict of interest that Katie Hobbs has violated is also a Class 6 felony.
Penalties.
“38-510. Penalties
A. A person who:
1. Intentionally or knowingly violates any provision of sections 38-503 through 38-505 is guilty of a class 6 felony.
2. Recklessly or negligently violates any provision of sections 38-503 through 38-505 is guilty of a class 1 misdemeanor.
B. A person found guilty of an offense described in subsection A of this section shall forfeit his public office or employment if any.
C. It is no defense to a prosecution for a violation of sections 38-503 through 38-505 that the public officer or employee to whom a benefit is offered, conferred or agreed to be conferred was not qualified or authorized to act in the desired way.
D. It is a defense to a prosecution for a violation of sections 38-503 through 38-505 that the interest charged to be substantial was a remote interest.”
