And/or?
Nasor said:
If someone falls down their stairs after smoking marijuana that you sold them, their death didn't occur "in the course of and in furtherance of the offense or immediate flight from the offense."
I constructed the scenario specifically to cover this point. The issue that set the victim into motion in the first place is a direct result of the illegal action.
Acting either alone or with one or more other persons the person commits or attempts to commit ... , marijuana offenses under section 13-3405 ... the person or another person causes the death of any person. (
ARS 13-1105)
If we compare your presentation of the statute to what is written in the statute:
.... or unlawful flight from a pursuing law enforcement vehicle under section 28-622.01 and in the course of and in furtherance of the offense or immediate flight from the offense, the person or another person causes the death of any person. (ibid)
The phrase you quoted--"in the course of and in furtherance of the offense or immediate flight from the offense"--pertains specifically to unlawful flight from law enforcement, which is merely one of the many conditions included in paragraph A.2 of 13-1105, e.g.,
• sexual assault, or
• sexual conduct with a minor, or
• molestation of a child, or,
• terrorism, or
• marijuana offense, or
• dangerous drug offenses, or
• narcotics offenses ... that equal or exceed the statutory threshold amount for each offense or combination of offenses, or
• involving minors in drug offenses, or
• kidnapping, or
• arson, or
• robbery, or
• escape, or
• child abuse, or
• unlawful flight from a pursuing law enforcement vehicle ... and in the course of and in furtherance of the offense or immediate flight from the offense
• causes the death of any person
Note the number of times the word "or" comes up. Without it, as such, the law doesn't make
any sense whatsoever.
One need not be in flight to invoke the murder charge. One only needs the death to occur in the context of any of the listed crimes. In fact, if you look at the clause about unlawful flight, it starts with "or". An "Oxford comma" would need to precede the word "and", which occurs immediately before your quote begins, in order to restrict the issue to flight from any of those crimes.
Note on Edit: I should also mention that the scenario of falling down the stairs is based partially on experience. Nobody fell down the stairs, but I did once pull a burning seed through a damaged screen. I'm glad I didn't have to attempt any stairs. Additionally, these days, I don't use screens, resulting in frequent pull-through of ash, partially-burned marijuana, and, if I'm not vigilant, burning seeds. Once you make the transition to glass pipes, screens are counterintuitive.