 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Defenders of Wildlife v. Hull, 1 CA-CV 99-0624,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION ONE, DEPARTMENT D, February 13, 2001, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Arizona state legislation disclaiming the State's right, title, or interest to state river bedlands was held to be an unconstitutional violation of the Arizona Constitution's gift clause and the public trust doctrine.
|
|||||
| Lane v. City of Tempe, 1 CA-CV 99-0445,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION ONE, DEPARTMENT B, February 13, 2001, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a personal injury action, defendants forfeited the opportunity to appeal from an arbitrator's award by failing to appear.
|
|||||
| State ex rel. Arizona Dep't of Health Servs. v. Hoggatt, 2 CA-SA 00-0139,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION TWO, DEPARTMENT B, February 13, 2001, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Department of Health was properly ordered to transport defendants from treatment center to court for Frye hearing on sex offender status; the legislature had vested the department with the care and supervision of defendants.
|
|||||
| State v. Lucas, 1 CA-CR 99-0567,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION ONE, DEPARTMENT B, February 13, 2001, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in overruling defendant's objection to the State's strike of male African American venire member. State's impermissible reason for peremptory strike tainted any nondiscriminatory reasons it may have had.
|
|||||
| State v. Sanchez, 2 CA-CR 99-0029, 2 CA-CR 00-0232-PR (Consolidated),
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION TWO, DEPARTMENT B, February 13, 2001, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although DHS approved blood testing methods used by crime labs, there was no statutory requirement for labs to employ identical procedures in applying those methods; thus, admission of appellant's blood evidence was proper.
|
|||||
| In re Edwards, Supreme Court No. SB-01-0028-D,
SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA, February 15, 2001, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In disciplinary proceedings, censure and costs assessed against attorney were appropriate sanctions for attorney's failure to act with reasonable diligence in representing clients where significant mitigation was present.
|
|||||
| In re Leon G., 1 CA-MH 00-0004,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION ONE, DEPARTMENT E, February 15, 2001, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where person who pleaded guilty to molestation and sexual abuse was found to be a sexually violent person, Arizona's sexually violent predator statute was unconstitutional, because act did not require volitional impairment.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Contact Us |
| Copyright® 2009 LexisNexis , a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. |
