Call (602) 467-3680
Arizona DUI Case Study · Court of Appeals · 2022
State v. Dean: What Arizona DUI Defendants Need to Know About Missing Body Camera Evidence and Aggravated DUI With a Suspended License
If you or someone you love is facing DUI charges in Arizona — especially aggravated (felony) DUI — a 2022 Arizona Court of Appeals ruling has some important lessons that apply directly to your case. This decision touches on two of the most common questions I hear from clients: “Can the police losing evidence help my case?” and “What if I wasn’t actually driving when the accident happened?” The answers may surprise you.
📋 Case at a Glance
- Case Name
- State v. Dean, No. 1 CA-CR 21-0259
- Court
- Arizona Court of Appeals, First Division
- Decided
- April 28, 2022
- County
- Maricopa County Superior Court
- Charges
- Two counts Aggravated DUI (A.R.S. § 28-1383); Leaving the Scene
- Verdict
- Guilty on both Aggravated DUI counts; Not guilty on leaving the scene
- Sentence
- Four months’ imprisonment + three years supervised probation
- Key Issue
- Whether missing body camera footage required a Willits adverse-inference instruction
- Outcome
- Convictions affirmed — Willits instruction properly denied
What Happened in State v. Dean
Here is the story in plain English. Clarence James Dean was driving a Dodge Charger in Maricopa County when it rear-ended another vehicle hard enough to send it into a wall. A bystander who witnessed the collision followed the Charger to a nearby parking lot and watched Dean step out of the driver’s door to inspect the damage. When the witness asked Dean if he was going back to check on the person he hit, Dean said yes.
Dean then got back into the Charger and drove — somewhat past the accident scene — before a police officer pulled him over. Officers noticed that Dean’s eyes were watery and bloodshot, they could smell alcohol, and Dean failed field sobriety tests. A blood draw about 70 minutes after the collision showed a BAC of 0.164% — more than twice the legal limit. His driver’s license was both suspended and revoked at the time. He admitted to police that he had been driving.
At trial, Dean changed his story. He testified that a friend had actually been driving the Charger when it hit the other car, and that this friend had bolted from the scene without explanation. The jury didn’t buy it — and the eyewitness’s account, the timing of events, and Dean’s own original statements all contradicted his new version of events. The jury convicted him of both aggravated DUI counts but found him not guilty of leaving the scene.
Issue #1: The Missing Body Camera Recording and the Willits Instruction
Here’s where things get legally interesting — and directly relevant to your case if you’re fighting DUI charges in Arizona.
The witness who followed Dean’s car was interviewed by a police officer who reported having activated his body camera. When the defense later looked for that recording, it wasn’t in the upload log. The officer had moved out of state and didn’t testify at trial. Dean’s attorney asked the judge to give the jury what’s called a Willits instruction — a direction telling jurors they can draw a negative inference against the State because evidence is missing.
What Exactly Is a Willits Instruction?
The Willits instruction — named after a landmark 1964 Arizona Supreme Court case — allows jurors to infer that lost or destroyed evidence would have been unfavorable to the State. The idea is straightforward: if police or prosecutors lose or destroy something that was in their control, the defendant shouldn’t suffer for it. That inference, standing alone, can sometimes create enough doubt for an acquittal.
Arizona Law — The Willits Test
To be entitled to a Willits instruction, a defendant must prove that (1) the State failed to preserve material and reasonably accessible evidence that could have had a tendency to exonerate the accused, and (2) there was resulting prejudice. State v. Glissendorf, 235 Ariz. 147, 150 (2014). Speculation about how missing evidence might have helped is not enough — there must be a concrete, factual basis.
Dean argued the missing body camera footage might have shown the witness saying something different during his police interview than what he testified to at trial — specifically, that the witness mentioned seeing a second person with Dean in the parking lot. That would have supported Dean’s story that a friend had been driving.
The Court of Appeals said no. And this is the part you need to understand if you’re hoping missing evidence will save your case.
The court found Dean’s argument was hypothetical — he was speculating that the video might have contained something helpful. But the witness’s trial testimony was entirely consistent with the 911 call, the timeline, and Dean’s own original statements to police. Defense counsel hadn’t found any cracks in the witness’s story during cross-examination. Without a concrete factual basis to believe the video would have shown something different, a Willits instruction wasn’t warranted.
Issue #2: Aggravated DUI in Arizona — You Don’t Have to Be Driving “at the Time of the Accident”
Here’s the second major lesson from State v. Dean, and it’s one that catches people off guard.
Dean’s entire trial defense was built on the idea that someone else was driving when the collision happened. Even if that were true — and the jury didn’t believe it — it wouldn’t have mattered for the DUI charges.
Why? Because Dean Admitted He Drove the Car Afterward.
Dean told police he drove the Charger from the parking lot back toward the collision site. That short drive — while his BAC was 0.164% and his license was suspended — was all the State needed. Arizona’s DUI statute, A.R.S. § 28-1381, makes it unlawful to “drive or be in actual physical control of a vehicle” while impaired. The prosecutor correctly pointed out to the jury that Dean’s own admission to driving back to the scene — even post-accident — established the driving element of the DUI charges, regardless of who was behind the wheel during the crash itself.
Arizona Revised Statutes — DUI & Aggravated DUI
A.R.S. § 28-1381(A): It is unlawful for a person to drive or be in actual physical control of a vehicle if impaired to the slightest degree or with a BAC of 0.08% or more.
A.R.S. § 28-1383(A)(1): Aggravated DUI applies when a person commits a DUI while their driver’s license or privilege to drive is suspended, cancelled, revoked, or refused. This is a Class 4 felony carrying mandatory prison time.
Because Dean’s license was both suspended and revoked, those two DUI counts were elevated to felonies under A.R.S. § 28-1383. He was sentenced to four months in prison followed by three years of probation on both counts, running concurrently.
The eyewitness testimony was, in the court’s words, “unnecessary and largely irrelevant” to the DUI convictions. The blood test, the field sobriety tests, the motor vehicle records showing the suspended/revoked license, and Dean’s own admission to driving were overwhelming evidence — with or without any body camera footage.
If you are facing DUI charges in Arizona — especially aggravated DUI — here are the direct takeaways from State v. Dean:
- Anything you say to police becomes evidence against you. Dean’s admission that he drove the car back to the scene was central to his conviction — even when his trial testimony told a completely different story. You have the right to remain silent. Use it and call an attorney immediately.
- You don’t have to be driving at the moment of an accident to be convicted of DUI. Arizona law covers any act of driving or being in actual physical control of a vehicle while impaired. Post-accident driving counts.
- Missing body camera footage alone won’t get you a Willits instruction. You need a concrete factual argument — not speculation — that the missing evidence would have been favorable to you. Your attorney needs to actively build this case, not just point to the gap.
- Driving with a suspended or revoked license transforms a DUI into a felony. Aggravated DUI under A.R.S. § 28-1383 carries mandatory prison time and a permanent felony record. The stakes are vastly higher than a standard misdemeanor DUI.
- BAC well above the limit adds to the State’s case. Dean’s BAC of 0.164% — drawn 70 minutes after the fact — provided strong evidence even accounting for the time that had passed.
- Time matters. If you’ve been arrested for DUI in Arizona, you have only 30 days to request an MVD hearing to protect your driver’s license. Don’t wait.
Why an Experienced Arizona DUI Attorney Makes All the Difference
Reading a case like State v. Dean, it’s easy to see where things went wrong for the defendant: the conflicting statements, the failure to establish a concrete basis for the Willits instruction, the overwhelming evidence that remained regardless of the eyewitness. None of this is inevitable. An experienced DUI attorney, working the case from the moment of arrest, can make a significant difference in your outcome — whether that’s a dismissal, reduced charge, or the best possible result at trial.
In my 47 years of handling DUI cases across Arizona — more than 6,000 clients in courts throughout Maricopa County, Pinal County, and beyond — I’ve seen how early, proactive defense changes outcomes. Evidence requests go out immediately. MVD hearings get filed on day one. Body camera requests are made before recordings get lost. And when evidence is missing, I build the concrete factual record that makes a Willits argument viable — not just speculative.
If you’re facing DUI charges anywhere in Arizona, the sooner you get an attorney involved, the more options you have.
Frequently Asked Questions — Arizona DUI Evidence & Aggravated DUI
Questions Arizona DUI defendants most often ask about body camera evidence, the Willits instruction, and aggravated DUI with a suspended license — answered by Gordon Thompson, Phoenix DUI attorney with 47 years of experience.
A Willits instruction is a jury direction in Arizona that allows jurors to draw a negative inference against the State — meaning they can assume the missing evidence would have helped the defendant — when police or prosecutors fail to preserve material evidence. Named after the 1964 Arizona Supreme Court case State v. Willits, it can be powerful enough to create reasonable doubt on its own.
To get a Willits instruction, you must show two things: (1) the State failed to preserve material and reasonably accessible evidence that could have tended to exonerate you, and (2) you were prejudiced by that failure. Speculation that the evidence “might” have helped is not enough — you need a concrete, factual argument that the missing evidence was actually favorable to your defense. As State v. Dean shows, courts will deny the instruction if the argument is purely hypothetical.
It can — but only if your attorney can build a concrete argument that the recording likely contained something favorable to your defense. In State v. Dean, a body camera recording of a key witness interview appeared to be missing, but the Court of Appeals denied the Willits instruction because the defendant could only speculate that the footage would have helped him. The witness’s trial testimony was consistent with everything else in the record, and defense counsel hadn’t found any inconsistencies to point to.
The lesson: if body camera footage is missing in your Arizona DUI case, tell your attorney immediately. Evidence requests need to go out fast, and your attorney needs to actively develop the factual record showing specifically how that video would have helped — not just that it’s gone. Done right, missing evidence can be a powerful tool for the defense. Done poorly, it’s a dead end.
Aggravated DUI in Arizona is a felony DUI charge under A.R.S. § 28-1383. It applies when a person drives under the influence under any of the following circumstances:
— Their driver’s license or privilege to drive is suspended, cancelled, revoked, or refused
— A passenger under the age of 15 is in the vehicle
— They have a prior felony DUI conviction
— An ignition interlock device was required on the vehicle
Aggravated DUI is a Class 4 or Class 6 felony (depending on the specific charge) and carries mandatory prison time — not jail — along with felony probation, extended license revocation, fines, and a permanent criminal record. If you’re facing aggravated DUI anywhere in Arizona, you need an experienced felony DUI defense attorney from the very start.
This combination automatically elevates your charge from misdemeanor DUI to Aggravated (felony) DUI under A.R.S. § 28-1383 — one of the most serious DUI charges Arizona law provides for. The consequences are significantly more severe than a standard DUI and include mandatory prison time, extended license revocation, felony probation, heavy fines and surcharges, required ignition interlock device use, and a permanent felony conviction that can affect your employment, housing, professional licenses, and civil rights.
If you’re in this situation, please don’t wait. The window to protect your rights — including the 30-day MVD deadline — is short. Call me today for a free consultation: (602) 467-3680.
No — and this is one of the most important things to understand about Arizona DUI law. A.R.S. § 28-1381 makes it unlawful to “drive or be in actual physical control” of a vehicle while impaired. You don’t have to be driving at the exact moment of an accident for a DUI conviction to hold.
State v. Dean makes this crystal clear. Even if someone else had been driving during the collision — which the jury didn’t believe — it wouldn’t have mattered for the DUI conviction. Dean admitted he drove the car back to the accident scene afterward, while his BAC was 0.164% and his license was suspended. That brief act of post-accident driving while impaired was sufficient to sustain a felony DUI conviction. What you do in the moments after an accident matters just as much as what you did before.
Yes — absolutely, and State v. Dean is a stark illustration. Dean admitted to police at the scene that he had been driving the vehicle. When he testified at trial that a friend was driving, the jury saw the contradiction. His own original statements were central to the State’s case and directly contradicted his trial defense.
You have the right to remain silent under the Fifth Amendment. After an accident where there is any possibility of impairment, you should politely decline to answer questions about driving until you have spoken with an attorney. Be cooperative with officers about your identity and insurance, but do not make statements about who was driving, where you came from, or whether you had been drinking. Those words can — and in Arizona often do — become the foundation of a DUI prosecution.
Under A.R.S. § 28-1381(A)(1), Arizona makes it unlawful to drive while impaired “to the slightest degree” by alcohol, drugs, or any combination. This is one of the lowest impairment standards in the country. You can be convicted of DUI in Arizona even with a BAC below 0.08% if the State can show that any level of impairment affected your ability to drive. In State v. Dean, with a BAC of 0.164% and failed field sobriety tests, this element was never in doubt.
What makes this standard so important for your defense is that the State doesn’t need to prove you were severely intoxicated — only that your ability to drive was impaired to any degree. This is why having an attorney who knows how to challenge the State’s evidence — blood test procedures, field sobriety test administration, the officer’s observations — is so critical. A small procedural error can be the difference between conviction and dismissal.
Act immediately. Missing evidence issues have a short window — recordings get overwritten, officers get transferred, memories fade. Here is what you should do:
1. Call an experienced Arizona DUI attorney today. The sooner an attorney is on your case, the sooner formal evidence preservation letters go out — to the law enforcement agency, to the court, to any third parties who may have footage.
2. Write down everything you remember. The names of any witnesses, what was said, what the officer was doing, what cameras were present. Details matter.
3. Don’t discuss the case on social media or with anyone other than your attorney. Those conversations can be used against you.
4. Remember the 30-day MVD deadline. Your driver’s license is at risk the moment you’re arrested. Don’t let the deadline pass while you’re figuring out your next move.
Call me at (602) 467-3680 or contact me online for a free consultation — phone, video, or text, on your schedule.
Aggravated DUI with a suspended or revoked license is a Class 4 felony under A.R.S. § 28-1383. Penalties include mandatory prison time (the statute does not allow for conversion to home detention on this charge), felony probation, significant fines and surcharges, extended driver’s license revocation, required ignition interlock device installation upon reinstatement, and a permanent felony conviction on your record.
Prison sentences vary depending on the specific facts, prior record, and other circumstances, but the mandatory minimum is not negotiable under the statute. A skilled Arizona DUI defense attorney can analyze the evidence, challenge the legality of the stop, the accuracy of the blood test, whether your license was actually suspended at the time, and other factors that could lead to reduced charges or dismissal. The earlier you get an attorney involved, the more tools are available.
After a DUI arrest in Arizona, you have exactly 30 days from the date of arrest to request a Motor Vehicle Division (MVD) hearing to contest the automatic suspension of your driver’s license. If you miss this deadline — even by one day — the suspension goes into effect automatically, regardless of what happens in your criminal case. You can be found not guilty and still lose your license if you didn’t request the hearing in time.
This is why I file the MVD hearing request on day one for every new client — before anything else. If your 30-day window is approaching and you haven’t spoken to an attorney, please call me today at (602) 467-3680. This is one deadline you absolutely cannot afford to miss.
Talk to Gordon Thompson — Arizona’s Trusted DUI Defense Attorney
If you’ve been charged with DUI — misdemeanor anywhere in Arizona, I’m here to help. My practice is limited exclusively to DUI and criminal defense. When you call, you speak directly with me — not a paralegal, not a junior associate. Every case, every client, personally.
6,000+ Clients
Licensed Arizona Since 1982
Syracuse University College of Law
Flat Fee · No Hidden Costs
Free Consultation
Statewide Arizona
All-inclusive flat fee of $2,800–$3,300 with affordable payment plans. Free consultations by phone, video, or text — on your schedule.
Legal Disclaimer: This article is provided for general informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Reading this article does not create an attorney-client relationship. The information contained herein is based on Arizona law as of the date of publication and may not reflect subsequent changes. Every DUI case is unique and the outcome of any individual case depends on its specific facts and circumstances. If you have been charged with DUI or any criminal offense in Arizona, you should consult a qualified attorney immediately. Gordon Thompson is licensed to practice law in the State of Arizona and the State of New York. This firm does not represent clients in all jurisdictions.
Article reviewed and published July 15, 2026 by Gordon Thompson, Arizona State Bar licensed attorney.