Misdemeanor charges at Phoenix Municipal Court for Disobeying a Police Officer and Interfering with a Crime Scene Investigation carried stacked jail and probation exposure plus permanent law-enforcement-interference convictions. Future First negotiated a full dismissal by State motion.
At a glance
| Court | Phoenix Municipal Court |
| Original charges | Disobeying Police Officer and Interfering with Crime Scene Investigation (related charges including ARS § 13-2508), misdemeanors |
| Presumptive exposure | Up to 180 days of jail per count under ARS § 13-707, fines up to $2,500 per count plus 84 percent surcharges, supervised probation up to three years per count, and permanent misdemeanor convictions on the client’s record involving law enforcement interference that surface on every employment, housing, professional licensing, and immigration background screen |
| Result | State moved to dismiss all charges without prejudice; court granted the motion; no conviction; no fines; no probation; no jail |
| Set aside under ARS § 13-905 | Not needed (no conviction entered) |
| Eligibility for sealing | Approximately 2025 under ARS § 13-911, immediately |
The stakes
The client faced misdemeanor counts in Phoenix Municipal Court for Disobeying a Police Officer and Interfering with a Crime Scene Investigation. Convictions at this level would have meant up to 180 days of jail per count under ARS § 13-707, fines up to $2,500 per count plus 84 percent surcharges, supervised probation up to three years per count, and permanent misdemeanor convictions involving law enforcement interference on the client’s record that surface on every employment, housing, professional licensing, and immigration background screen.
What we did
Future First negotiated a full dismissal. The State moved to dismiss all charges without prejudice, and the court granted the motion. No conviction entered. No fines. No probation. No jail. Set aside under ARS § 13-905 not needed because no conviction was entered. Arrest record sealing under ARS § 13-911 available immediately, eligible approximately 2025.
What our clients say
Future First Criminal Law has earned hundreds of five-star reviews from clients across Arizona. Read our verified Google reviews or see what past clients have said on our client reviews page.
If you’re facing law enforcement interference charges in Arizona
Law-enforcement-interference misdemeanors (Disobeying a Police Officer, Resisting Arrest, Interfering with a Crime Scene, Failure to Comply) carry a unique long-tail problem. The conviction surfaces on every law enforcement and security background check for life. Employers in regulated industries (security, healthcare, education, financial services) treat law-enforcement-interference convictions as flags that affect hiring and licensing decisions.
Full dismissal at the prosecutor’s motion is the strongest possible outcome on any criminal case. The State moves to dismiss, the court grants the motion, and the case closes without conviction. Arrest record sealing under ARS § 13-911 becomes available immediately after dismissal, which removes the incident from public view going forward.
Dismissals at this stage typically follow defense work that surfaces proof problems, witness availability issues, or jurisdictional defects in the charging instrument. The State’s motion to dismiss closes the case more cleanly than a defense Motion to Dismiss granted over State objection because the State’s own filing of the motion eliminates appellate-style review on the dismissal.
Future First Criminal Law has handled law enforcement interference cases across Maricopa County and Arizona. We know how Phoenix Municipal Court evaluates State dismissal motions on misdemeanor cases.
Related resources
- Arizona criminal defense — misdemeanor defense strategy
- Set aside and sealing in Arizona — how to clean up your record
Call us
Facing law enforcement interference charges in Arizona? Call Future First Criminal Law at 602-932-7890 or request a free consultation. We have handled hundreds of Arizona misdemeanor cases. The earlier we are involved, the more options you have.
Anonymized in line with firm policy. Client name not used. Specific dates approximated to year only. Outcome described reflects this client’s actual results. Past outcomes do not guarantee future results. For more detailed information on Arizona criminal law, visit the Arizona State Legislature website.