Lonnie Lee Robbins v. Harold J. Cardwell, Warden, Arizona State Prison

Arizona permits imposition of sanctions on a criminal defendant for failure to comply with rules requiring notice to the prosecution of certain defenses and the names of witnesses. See Ariz.R.Crim.P. 15.7. The more extreme sanctions include striking a defense and prohibiting testimony by a defense witness or the accused himself. See Ariz.R.Crim.P. 15.7(a)(4). The issue whether these sanctions can be applied for breach of Ariz.R.Crim.P. 15.2 without offending the confrontation clause of the sixth amendment and the right to present a defense which is implicit in the sixth amendment is a constitutional question of importance to the administration of criminal justice. This question was expressly reserved by the Supreme Court in Wardius v. Oregon, 412 U.S. 470 , 472 n.4, 93 S.Ct. 2208, 2211 , 37 L.Ed.2d 82 (1973). See Note, The Preclusion Sanction — A Violation of the Constitutional Right to Present a Defense, 81 Yale L.J. 1342 (1972). We reject the argument that this issue is presented for our determination on the record in this case.

On this appeal from denial of habeas corpus relief, appellant contends his Arizona rape conviction under Ariz.Rev.Stat. §§ 13-611, 13-614 was improper…