Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

08/20/2019 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CR2019-001522-001 DT 08/12/2019

CLERK OF THE COURT

HONORABLE KATHERINE COOPER T. Sherwin
Deputy

STATE OF ARIZONA TRACEY GLEASON

KATE LOUDENSLAGEL

v.

MELISSA SUZANNE DIEGEL (001) ZACHARY V PIERCE

JAMIE A. BALSON

JUDGE COOPER

UNDER ADVISEMENT RULING

On July 26, 2019, the Court heard oral argument regarding Defendant’s Motion to
Modify Conditions of Release filed June 28, 2019 and the State’s Response filed July 8, 2019.

Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 7.4(b) provides that “[a]ny party may move for
reexamination of the conditions of release whenever…[there is the] existence of material facts
not previously presented to the court.”

Rule 7.2(a)(2) requires the release of a defendant charged with a bailable offense unless
the Court finds release will not 1) reasonably assure the defendant’s appearance, or 2) protect the
victim, another person or the community from risk of harm.

Finally, the Court must consider the factors described in A.R.S. 13-3967(B).

The Court does not find any newly-presented material facts. At the arraignment hearing
on June 14, 2019, the Court knew about the pending charges and Defendant’s lack of prior
felonies, community ties to Arizona, and financial circumstances. The Court also knew that
Defendant is a resident of Florida.
Docket Code 926 Form R000A Page 1
 SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CR2019-001522-001 DT 08/12/2019

In addition, pursuant to Rule 7.2(a)(2), the Court finds release will not reasonably assure
her appearance in court. The Court takes judicial notice of the record in JS 17676 which shows
that, between October 22 and November 19, 2015, Defendant failed to appear for seven (7)
hearings in the severance action involving the minor children (the victims in this criminal
matter).

The Court further finds that the current release conditions are warranted to protect the
minor victims in this matter. The State presents a detailed Response regarding the offenses
charged, the volume of the State’s evidence, the views of the victims who are fearful of
Defendant, and Defendant’s attempts to contact the minor victims in violation of the Juvenile
Court’s orders.

For these reasons,

IT IS ORDERED denying the Motion to Modify Conditions of Release.

Docket Code 926 Form R000A Page 2