Jeremy's Arizona Case: The Timeline Behind His 152.5-Year Sentence
Jeremy's Case at a Glance
Jeremy's case began with events at his Arizona apartment in October 2008, and it led to a 152 1⁄2-year prison sentence after a trial in February 2010.
I've spent years trying to get someone to look closely at what happened: a warrantless search, evidence that passed through the hands of a victim, publicity before he ever stood trial, a defense that fell apart, a sentence eight times larger than the plea he turned down, and post-conviction petitions the court miscounted.
This is the story as the record documents through transcripts, emails, police records and court documents — laid out in order, because Jeremy deserves a fair and impartial second look.
October 2008: The Search of Jeremy's Apartment
Jeremy's apartment was entered and searched by an “on again, off again” girlfriend of his. She didn't live there. She wasn't on the lease. She had no authorization to be inside.
She handled, moved, and manipulated evidence before she ever called the police — evidence that was later used against Jeremy. To this day, no one can say for certain how long she was alone in that apartment. The video camera and video tapes were compromised. Chain of custody of key evidence sat in the hands of an alleged victim, possibly for hours.
When police arrived, she walked them through the apartment. Officers then stayed inside — without a warrant — from 12:30 a.m. until 6:30 a.m., while Jeremy had no idea whether any of this was happening and there was no way for him to get back to his own home.
Jeremy's current attorney states that this was a warrantless search that violated Jeremy's Fourth Amendment rights.
February 2009: Arrest on 57 Charges
Police spent about six months building their case before arresting Jeremy in February 2009 on 57 charges.
Before trial, his name and face were put on the local news, with police asking potential victims to come forward. We argue that this violated his Sixth Amendment right to a fair trial — you can't ask the public to help build a case against someone and then expect an unbiased jury pool.
Jeremy was held without bail through this entire period, which meant he couldn't be there to help his own attorney prepare his defense.
Preparing for Trial: A Defense I Didn't Know Was Falling Apart
Jeremy hired an attorney and sold his '67 Dodge Charger to help cover the fee.
What we didn't know then — what none of us knew — was that this attorney was struggling with drug addiction, had been in and out of rehab, and was dealing with mental health issues.
For months, this attorney kept Jeremy ‘pumped up,’ telling him we had a strong case. He talked to Jeremy about going to trial. He never explained to Jeremy what prison time would mean if he lost.
He called the plea offer “shit” and dismissed the judges — including the judge overseeing the settlement conference — telling Jeremy that everything would change once he filed a Motion to Sever the charges. That motion was never filed. Because of that, if Jeremy was found guilty of even one charge, he would be found guilty of all of them.
February 2010: Watching the Case Come Apart
As the trial date got closer, I watched this attorney's behavior grow erratic. His communication with Jeremy dropped off. He hadn't prepared motions he stated were needed — hadn't interviewed a single witness from the list of 12 people Jeremy provided to him, hadn't gotten the evaluation the defense needed, and hadn't properly reviewed the evidence.
His moods swung wildly. The night before trial, he came to Jeremy and asked, “So, what's the game plan?”
Jeremy Tries to Tell the Court
On the first day of trial, just before the jury was brought in, Jeremy told the judge directly that his attorney wasn't prepared — that he hadn't interviewed key witnesses, let alone any of the 12 people on the list Jeremy had given him; he hadn't obtained an evaluation; and he hadn't properly reviewed the crucial evidence or had it properly reviewed by a professional. The trial transcripts record those concerns in Jeremy's own words.
Jeremy's words went unheard, and his attorney argues his due process rights were violated that day.
The Plea Offer: Roughly 19 Years
Before trial, the State of Arizona offered Jeremy a plea: 14 years flat, plus an additional 6 years at 85% for good behavior — a total of roughly 19 years and 1 month. He had already been in jail roughly a year.
The State felt that a sentence of 14–20 years was an appropriate punishment for Jeremy's charges. Jeremy did not take it. He went to trial instead.
Trial Outcome: A 152½-Year Sentence
Jeremy was found guilty. He was sentenced to 152½ years.
The difference between the two numbers is what's often called a “trial penalty” — a sentence that's dramatically higher than the plea offer, imposed after someone exercises their constitutional right to a trial. In Jeremy's case, that difference is roughly eight times the plea offer.
Plea: approximately 19 years, 1 month
Trial: 152½ years
That gap is what is known as ‘Trial Penalty’: an excessive sentence. That sentence amounts to cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment.
Plea Offer vs. Trial Sentence
One path led to a 19-year sentence. The other path, because Jeremy asserted his right to a trial, led to a 152½-year sentence.
That's the number I want people to sit with.
Why I Keep Coming Back to “Trial Penalty”
A trial penalty is the gap between what a plea offer would have cost someone and what they receive after being convicted at trial. For Jeremy, that gap is the difference between roughly 19 years and 152½ years.
I don't think anyone should face a sentence that much larger simply because they chose to exercise a constitutional right. That's the Eighth Amendment issue at the heart of this case, and it's part of why I believe Arizona needs serious criminal justice reform.
Ineffective Assistance of Counsel
There is also a strong case for ineffective assistance of counsel.
Jeremy's current attorney filed a first Petition for Post-Conviction Relief for ineffective assistance of counsel before we had proof of the trial attorney's addiction.
After Jeremy's conviction, I acquired copies from the Arizona Bar Association of seven different complaints that had been filed against this attorney. All of them were from 2008–2010, the same time frame in which he had Jeremy's case.
First Post-Conviction Relief Petition
That first PCR petition was denied. The court described it as Jeremy's fourth petition before the court, stating that three prior petitions had all been denied. Only one had ever been filed. That was a court error, and it violated Jeremy's due process rights, as stated by his current attorney.
New Evidence and the Second PCR Petition
The trial attorney died of an overdose, and we finally had what we consider solid evidence of his addiction or compromised defense. We filed a second Petition for Post-Conviction Relief with this newly discovered evidence, and we also raised the earlier administrative error directly with the court: only one previous Petition had been filed, not three or four.
The court denied that petition too, ruling it untimely, and again referring to it as Jeremy's fourth petition.
August 2026: 17½ Years Served
As of August 2026, Jeremy has served 17½ years of his sentence. Without intervention, I believe he will die in prison — what advocates call “Death by Incarceration.”
What we're asking for is simple: for someone to acknowledge the court's error, and to give his current attorney's petitions a fair hearing, or a second chance look at Jeremy and the excessive sentence he was given.
Who Jeremy Has Become in Prison
Jeremy has been ordained by the Universal Life Church. He mentors, leads, and counsels other incarcerated people who need help. His peers elected him as a liaison with prison administration.
He's completed the educational courses available to him. Over 17½ years, he's donated more than $1,000 of his prison wages to charitable nonprofit groups. He organizes sports leagues, games, and competitions for other inmates. He's maintained steady employment with an exemplary record. He's also an artist — he illustrated the cover of a published prison recipe cookbook.
I share all of this because I believe it matters. This isn't someone who gave up. It's someone trying to prepare for a chance at re-entry he hasn't been given yet.
What I'm Asking For
A fair and impartial reconsideration of Jeremy's sentence.
Acknowledgment of the court's error regarding his petitions.
A real hearing for his current attorney's petitions.
Reconsideration of the “trial penalty” that turned a 19-year plea into a 152½-year sentence.
An opportunity, eventually, for re-entry.
Beyond Jeremy's case specifically, I believe Arizona needs serious criminal justice reform. Punitive, disproportionate sentencing doesn't leave room for rehabilitation, and I know this has not only happened to Jeremy.
The Question I Keep Asking: 19 Years, or 152½?
The State itself believed a fair resolution to this case was somewhere around 19 years. Jeremy exercised his right to a trial. He was convicted. He received 152½ years instead.
Either way, Jeremy would have stood guilty: the plea required him to plead guilty, and at trial he was found guilty. The only difference was the sentence — and the price of asserting his constitutional right to a trial.
That's not just a number to me — it's roughly eight times the plea offer, and it's the reason I keep telling this story.
Why I'm Telling This Story
I am asking people to look past the number 152 1⁄2-year sentence and see the events that led there: the October 2008 warrantless search, the February 2009 arrest, the compromised defense attorney, the due process and amendment right violations and the roughly 19-year plea he did not take, the 152.5 year sentence he got instead, and the post-conviction fight that's followed with inaccurate court accounting of his petitions filed.
I also want people to see who Jeremy has become in the 17½ years since he was convicted — someone who mentors, teaches, gives, and leads, even from inside.
My goal is simple: a fair and impartial reconsideration of Jeremy's sentence and his post-conviction claims, AND criminal justice reform in Arizona so this doesn't keep happening to other families.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is Jeremy's Arizona case about?
Jeremy's case involves a 2008 warrantless search of his apartment, evidence that was in the hands of a ‘victim’ prior to police custody, his 2009 arrest, concerns about his legal representation, or lack thereof: competency of his trial defense based on ‘after discovered evidence’ and his 2010 trial and 152 1⁄2-year sentence versus a 19.5 year plea offer, and the post-conviction proceedings that have followed and been ruled as having been submitted many more times than they have since.
How long is Jeremy's sentence?
Jeremy received a 152½-year sentence after his trial in February 2010.
How long was the plea offer?
The plea offer was 14 years plus an additional six years at 85% for good behavior — approximately 19 years and 1 month in total.
What is a trial penalty?
A trial penalty is the gap between the consequences of a plea agreement and the sentence a person receives after going to trial and being convicted. In Jeremy's case, that's the difference between roughly 19 years and 152½ years.
What is ineffective assistance of counsel?
It's a legal claim that a person's constitutional right to competent legal representation was violated. Jeremy's post-conviction claims center on his trial attorney's preparation and performance — an attorney we later learned was struggling with addiction throughout the case.
What happened with Jeremy's Post-Conviction Relief petitions?
Two PCR petitions were filed and denied. Both times, the court referred to the filing as Jeremy's fourth petition, though only two were ever filed. The second was also denied as untimely.
How long has Jeremy been incarcerated?
As of August 2026, Jeremy has served 17½ years.
Did any of Jeremy's crimes involve minors, or crimes against minors?
No, none involved children or pedophilia.
How can people support Justice 4 JAD?
You can learn more about Jeremy's case, sign our petition, or find donation and support options on the Justice 4 JAD website.
Comments