The Teresa Imel murder case centers on the July 1999 killing of Kurt Imel, a Walmart manager in Tucson, Arizona, arranged by his estranged wife Teresa Imel and their seventeen-year-old daughter Tiffanie during divorce proceedings. Teresa was convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to 28 years; Tiffanie was convicted of conspiracy to commit first-degree murder and is serving a life sentence with parole eligibility after 25 years. The case also produced a federal fight over a $200,000 life insurance policy and a published Arizona appellate decision on juvenile sentencing.
The 1999 Killing in Tucson
Kurt Imel was murdered in Tucson in July 1999 while he and Teresa were already in divorce proceedings.1PinalCentral. Legal Battle Ensues Over Slain Man’s Life Insurance Policy Reporting on the case described Teresa as orchestrating the killing to collect Kurt’s financial assets and support a lifestyle centered on methamphetamine use.2Corrections.com. Inmate Vying for Life Insurance From Prison
Tiffanie, then seventeen, helped plan the murder with her former boyfriend Troy Bertling.2Corrections.com. Inmate Vying for Life Insurance From Prison The group hired Daniel Ray Averett, described in court records as a brain-damaged man who had previously supplied drugs to the family, to carry out the killing. Averett was reportedly paid $5,000.3Eastern Arizona Courier. Local Lawyer To Be Featured on Oxygen Network
Teresa Imel’s Conviction and Sentence
Teresa was originally charged with first-degree murder and conspiracy to commit murder. She was convicted of manslaughter and pleaded guilty to a drug-related charge in exchange for dismissal of the conspiracy count. She received a 28-year prison sentence and was incarcerated at the Arizona State Prison Complex in Perryville.2Corrections.com. Inmate Vying for Life Insurance From Prison
Tiffanie Imel’s Conviction and Juvenile Sentencing Appeal
In 2001, a Pima County Superior Court jury convicted Tiffanie of second-degree murder and conspiracy to commit first-degree murder for her role in killing her adoptive father. She received a concurrent sixteen-year term for the murder count and life imprisonment with the possibility of release after twenty-five years for the conspiracy conviction.4Justia. State v. Imel, No. 2 CA-CR 2015-01125vLex. State v. Imel, No. 2 CA-CR 2015-0112
In 2003, the Arizona Court of Appeals affirmed the conspiracy conviction but vacated the second-degree murder conviction, leaving Tiffanie serving a life sentence on the conspiracy charge alone.5vLex. State v. Imel, No. 2 CA-CR 2015-0112
In June 2013, Tiffanie filed a petition for post-conviction relief under Rule 32 of the Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure, relying on the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2012 decision in Miller v. Alabama, which held that mandatory life-without-parole sentences for juvenile offenders violate the Eighth Amendment. The trial court agreed to vacate her original sentence. In 2014, Arizona enacted A.R.S. § 13-716, which provides parole eligibility for juvenile offenders sentenced to life. At a March 2015 resentencing, the court imposed life with the possibility of parole after twenty-five years under that statute.4Justia. State v. Imel, No. 2 CA-CR 2015-0112
Tiffanie appealed, arguing the sentence still required individualized Miller consideration. On November 20, 2015, the Arizona Court of Appeals, Division Two, disagreed, holding that A.R.S. § 13-716 supplied the “meaningful opportunity to obtain release based on demonstrated maturity and rehabilitation” that Miller and Graham v. Florida required. Because Tiffanie had not received the harshest possible penalty of natural life, the court found no further individualized sentencing was necessary and affirmed.4Justia. State v. Imel, No. 2 CA-CR 2015-0112
Arizona Department of Corrections records show Tiffanie remains at the Perryville Complex, serving the life sentence with a twenty-five-year minimum on the conspiracy charge along with a separate two-year, six-month sentence for an aggravated DUI conviction in Maricopa County.6Arizona Department of Corrections, Rehabilitation and Reentry. Inmate Data Search – Inmate 160401
The $200,000 Life Insurance Fight
Kurt’s death triggered a dispute over a $200,000 life insurance policy issued by the Life Insurance Company of North America. In June 1999, shortly before the killing, Kurt had begun divorce proceedings and removed Teresa as a beneficiary.1PinalCentral. Legal Battle Ensues Over Slain Man’s Life Insurance Policy
Kurt’s father, Ed Imel, received the first $100,000. The insurance company then filed suit in U.S. District Court asking the court to decide who should receive the remaining $100,000, because Teresa’s manslaughter conviction could legally disqualify her from proceeds tied to her husband’s death. In November 2001, Teresa attempted from prison to transfer her rights in the policy to her three children, and the court was asked to determine whether that transfer was valid.1PinalCentral. Legal Battle Ensues Over Slain Man’s Life Insurance Policy
Media Coverage
The case drew attention beyond Tucson. The Oxygen network’s true-crime series Snapped produced an episode on the murder, with interviews including former Tucson Citizen reporter A.J. Flick, who had spoken with Tiffanie years after the trial.7Tucson Weekly. Media Watch A local attorney involved in the case was also slated to appear.3Eastern Arizona Courier. Local Lawyer To Be Featured on Oxygen Network