 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Freelance Interpreting Servs., Inc. v. State, 1 CA-TX 05-0005,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION ONE, DEPARTMENT T, May 9, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An employer's administrative appeal of a determination of the Arizona Department of Economic Security Appeals Board was untimely pursuant to Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 23-724(A) (1995) where the employer's request for reconsideration was postmarked 17 days after the date of the determination; thus dismissal of the administrative appeal was proper.
|
|||||
| State v. Johnson, Arizona Supreme Court No. CR-03-0420-AP,
SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA, May 9, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Victim was killed to eliminate her testimony against defendant's fellow gang member on robbery charges; thus, aggravating factor in Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-703.F(6) was established. Severance of assisting criminal gang count from murder and other charges was not required because gang evidence was admitted to show motive/identity for other crimes.
|
|||||
| State v. Berger, Arizona Supreme Court No. CR-05-0101-PR,
SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA, May 10, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's sentence of a total of 200 years for 20 separate counts of sexual exploitation of a minor was not grossly disproportionate, under the Eighth Amendment, because the 10-year sentence imposed for each offence was consistent with the State's penological goal of deterring the production and possession of child pornography.
|
|||||
| State v. Machado, 2 CA-CR 2004-0362,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION TWO, DEPARTMENT A, May 10, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant was not entitled to spousal defense to sexual assault under Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-1401(4) because evidence did not support contention that defendant and wife were cohabitating. Renunciation of solicitation to murder was not admissible under Ariz. R. Evid. 803(3) because statement was not relevant as to state of mind.
|
|||||
| Evans Withycombe, Inc. v. Western Innovations, Inc., 1 CA-CV 04-0196,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION ONE, DEPARTMENT D, May 11, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where contractor was sued by homeowners and asserted claims against subcontractors for defects in homeowners' residence, contractor's claims based on contracts were barred since statute of repose set out in Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-552 was not limited to homeowners' claims, but statute did not bar non-contractual claims for common law indemnification.
|
|||||
| Sun Valley Fin. Servs. of Phoenix, L.L.C. v. Guzman, 1 CA-CV 04-0568,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION ONE, DEPARTMENT A, May 11, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in foreclosing right of a successor in interest to redeem a prior tax lien because a judgment foreclosing a property owner's right to redeem could not be entered where a lien had previously been redeemed, pursuant to Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 42-18206.
|
|||||
| State v. Booker, 1 CA-CR 04-0530,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION ONE, DEPARTMENT C, May 18, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Record did not reflect that use of a bong in aggravated assault proceedings against defendant was in the zone of primary interest of the officers who conducted the illegal search and seizure. Thus, application of the exclusionary rule, a judicially created means of effectuating U.S. Const. amend. IV, would not have served rule's deterrent purpose.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
