Baker v. Superior Court
In Baker v. Superior Court (1997) 190 Ariz. 336, 947 P.2d 910, the court addressed whether the provisions of the proposition should be applied when the offense was committed prior to passage of the proposition, but the conviction was rendered after the effective date of the statute.
The language of Proposition 200 (A.R.S., 13-901.01) passed by the voters of the State of Arizona in 1996 is substantially similar to the language of section 1210.1, subdivisions (a) and (b), passed by the California voters as part of Proposition 36.
The Arizona court noted that the literal language of the statute and the purpose and intent of the proposition would indicate that Proposition 200 should be applied to cases in which the conviction was not final as of the effective date of the proposition.
However, other provisions of Arizona law provide that when the penalty for an offense is altered, the penalty in effect at the time the crime is committed is applicable to the offense, even if the modification is ameliorative. (Id. at p. 338.)
Thus, Arizona's other provisions of law precluded application to pending cases.