 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Flying Diamond Airpark, LLC v. Meienberg, 2 CA-CV 2006-0092,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION TWO, DEPARTMENT A, April 30, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because an owner proceeded with the construction of a hangar, despite being warned during such that the height requirement of a restrictive covenant would have been exceeded by installing certain roof vents, the owner was unable to claim the benefit of relative hardships; therefore, a mandatory injunction was granted in favor of an association.
|
|||||
| State v. Johnson, 2 CA-CR 2005-0219,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION TWO, DEPARTMENT B, April 30, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because defendant was not an accomplice to burglary of victim's home, her felony murder conviction under Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 13-1105(A)(2) was reversed. Although she planned and intended to aid in burglary of the victim's shed, there was no substantial evidence that she knew, intended, or expected that men might also burglarize victim's home.
|
|||||
| State v. Miller, 2 CA-CR 2006-0137,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION TWO, DEPARTMENT B, April 30, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court properly allowed evidence that, following defendant's arrest, no further armed robberies involving the same modus operandi occurred in the city because that evidence had a tendency to make it more probable that defendant committed the crimes, Ariz. R. Evid. 401, and the evidence did not lack sufficient relevance to be admissible.
|
|||||
| Brookover v. Roberts Enters., 1 CA-CV 05-0444,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION ONE, DEPARTMENT E, May 8, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court properly granted a cow owner summary judgment on a negligence claim related to a cow-automobile collision where there was no evidence that the owner had notice of any specific dangerous condition, no showing that the lack of warning signs caused the accident, and no showing that the res ipsa loquitur doctrine applied.
|
|||||
| State v. Morales, Arizona Supreme Court No. CR-06-0374-PR,
SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA, May 8, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although the trial court fundamentally erred under Ariz. R. Crim. P. 17.6 in not conducting a plea-type colloquy when defendant's counsel stipulated to prior convictions for purposes of Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-604(C) (2001), defendant was not entitled to resentencing where copies of his prior convictions had been admitted at his pretrial hearing.
|
|||||
| State v. Walker, 1 CA-CR 06-0227,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION ONE, DEPARTMENT A, May 8, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A motion to suppress evidence was properly denied in a drug case because defendant's Fourth Amendment rights were not violated when evidence used against him was seized during a probation search conducted on the residence of his girlfriend, which he shared. The scope of the search properly included a locked trunk in the living room.
|
|||||
| Cohen v. Frey, 2 CA-CV 2006-0155,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION TWO, DEPARTMENT B, May 9, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Due to a trial court's duty to ensure that a marital settlement agreement was fair under Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-317(D) and the fact that reading a provision to allow a former husband to sell a residence for any price would have rendered a former wife's one-half interest illusory, an examination of the sales price should have been conducted.
|
|||||
| State v. Tucker, Arizona Supreme Court No. CR-05-0162-AP,
SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA, May 13, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Under Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-703(F)(6), (8), defendant's death sentences for three murders were upheld because, inter alia, (1) first victim was conscious when she was bound and strangled, and she suffered extreme physical pain when she was bludgeoned, sexually assaulted, and strangled; and (2) State proved that defendant committed multiple murders.
|
|||||
| Salt River Project Agric. Improvement & Power Dist. v. Miller Park, L.L.C., 1 CA-CV 05-0730,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARIZONA, DIVISION ONE, DEPARTMENT B, May 15, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where property owners were awarded compensation in a condemnation action, the owners' tax protest material was properly excluded as irrelevant because the material had been prepared for tax, not condemnation, purposes; the jury's verdict was not excessive, and the owners were entitled to sanctions under Ariz. R. Civ. P. 68(d).
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
