|
|
| |
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!
|
| |
State Courts -
Arizona - April 21 - May 4, 2005
|
| |
|
| |
State v. Kuck, No. 1 CA-CR 03-0987,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION ONE, DEPARTMENT B, April 21, 2005, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: When case was submitted to jury for deliberations, only one alleged prior felony conviction remained. Thus, under Ariz. Rev. Stat. ? 13-710, maximum sentence to which defendant was exposed when case went to jury was 22 or 25 years. Thus, under Ariz. Const. art. 2, ? 23 and Ariz. Rev. Stat. ? 21-102(A) (2002), he was not entitled to 12-member jury.
|
|
| |
|
| |
In re Stephanie N., 1 CA-JV 04-0203,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION ONE, DEPARTMENT D, April 28, 2005, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: In appeal of revocation of probation, juvenile court properly determined that it still had jurisdiction, pursuant to Ariz. Rev. Stat. ? 8-341(B) (Supp. 2004), although one year had passed since juvenile was placed on probation, because juvenile court had originally acquired jurisdiction in accordance with Ariz. Rev. Stat. ? 8-202(G) (Supp. 2004).
|
|
| |
|
| |
State v. Manzanedo, 2 CA-CR 2003-0238,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION TWO, DEPARTMENT B, April 29, 2005, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: Defendant ripped telephone out of a wall and threw food tray during prison riot. Thus, evidence was sufficient to show that he damaged another's property and to convict him of criminal damage, Ariz. Rev. Stat. ? 13-1602. As jury found total amount of damage in verdict on criminal damage charge, that finding could be used to aggravate his sentences.
|
|
| |
|
| |
Daimlerchrysler Servs. N. Am., LLC v. Ariz. Dep't of Revenue, 1 CA-TX 04-0012,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION ONE, DEPARTMENT T, May 3, 2005, Filed
View this case - free
|
Overview: In a tax matter, auto manufacturer, to whom dealers had assigned loan agreements, was not allowed to take a bad debt deduction when it bought contracts without recourse against dealers because Ariz. Admin. Code 15-5-2011 provided that the deduction applied to vendors.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Back to Top |
| |
|
Worldwide
Feedback
Feedback