A Class 1 Misdemeanor Interfering with Judicial Proceedings plus a Class 2 Misdemeanor Criminal Damage at Phoenix Municipal Court tied to a 2021 incident carried permanent misdemeanor records, probation, fines, restitution, and a “disobeyed court order” flag on every background check. Future First worked the defense through motions and discovery. Both counts dismissed.
At a glance
| Court | Phoenix Municipal Court |
| Original charges | Interfering with Judicial Proceedings – Disobeying Court Order (ARS § 13-2810(A)(2)), Class 1 Misdemeanor; Criminal Damage Under $250 – Defacing Property (ARS § 13-1602(A)(1)), Class 2 Misdemeanor |
| Presumptive exposure | Permanent misdemeanor convictions on both counts, probation, fines, restitution, and a record of disobeying a court order that surfaces on every background screen for life. The Interfering count carries the heavier C1M consequences |
| Result | Phoenix Municipal Court dismissed both counts after defense motions and discovery; no conviction; no probation; no fines; no restitution; 2021 case fully closed with record clean |
| Set aside under ARS § 13-905 | Not needed (no conviction entered) |
| Eligibility for sealing | Available immediately under ARS § 13-911 (no conviction triggered a wait period) |
The stakes
The client faced two misdemeanor counts in Phoenix Municipal Court tied to a 2021 incident that lingered for years: a Class 1 Misdemeanor Interfering with Judicial Proceedings under ARS § 13-2810(A)(2) for disobeying a court order, and a Class 2 Misdemeanor Criminal Damage under ARS § 13-1602(A)(1) for defacing property. Convictions on either count carry permanent misdemeanor records, with the Interfering count adding a “disobeyed a court order” flag that complicates every future background check and licensing review.
What we did
Future First worked the defense across motions, discovery, and pretrial litigation. The Phoenix Municipal Court dismissed both counts in January 2025. No conviction entered. No probation, fines, or restitution imposed. The 2021 case fully closed with the record clean. Set aside under ARS § 13-905 not needed because no conviction. Arrest record sealing under ARS § 13-911 available immediately because no conviction triggered a wait period.
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 Interfering with Judicial Proceedings charges in Arizona
Interfering with Judicial Proceedings under ARS § 13-2810 covers a range of conduct including disobeying a court order, refusing to comply with subpoenas, and other actions that obstruct judicial process. The conviction carries a “disobeyed a court order” record imprint that complicates every future background check, licensing review, and immigration screen. The flag follows the client through every interaction with the legal system going forward.
Working an older case (here a 2021 incident) through motions and discovery often produces the strongest outcome because the State’s evidence has had time to degrade. Witnesses move. Memories fade. Evidence-handling defects surface. The court’s evaluation of the proof shifts. When the defense surfaces real proof problems and presses them, the prosecutor’s settlement posture changes.
Both counts dismissed through court order is the cleanest possible outcome on any criminal case. Arrest record sealing under § 13-911 becomes available immediately.
Future First Criminal Law has handled Interfering with Judicial Proceedings cases across Maricopa County and Arizona. We know how Phoenix Municipal Court evaluates motion practice and discovery on older cases.
Related resources
- Arizona criminal defense — misdemeanor defense strategy
- Set aside and sealing in Arizona — how to clean up your record
Call us
Facing Interfering with Judicial Proceedings 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.