In Mungarro v. Riley, 170 Ariz. 589, 826 P.2d 1215 (App. 1991), the Court applied the Rothweiler test (Rothweiler v. Superior Court of Pima County ) and held that false reporting is a jury-eligible offense. The Court determined that the potential penalty for the violation of A.R.S. 13-2907.01 is not serious and that the crime of false reporting has no common law antecedent. Id. at 590, 826 P.2d at 1216. The Court then determined that a conviction for false reporting "would reflect adversely on Mungarro's moral character" and held that a jury trial was required under the moral quality prong of the Rothweiler test. Id. The potential penalty for violation of A.R.S. 13-2907.01 is a six-month jail term and a fine of up to $ 2500. See A.R.S. 13-707(A)(1) (2001), -802(A) (2001). In Derendal v. Griffith, 209 Ariz. 416, 104 P.3d 147 (2005) the Arizona Supreme Court removed the moral quality prong of the Rothweiler test. 209 Ariz. at 424, PP31-32, 104 P.3d at 155. The court recognized that the moral quality prong had become subjective and ambiguous, resulting in inconsistent outcomes, and concluded that neither the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution nor the Arizona Constitution requires the application of a moral quality test. Id.