A. The chief judge shall assign three of the judges to each department, and such assignment may be changed by him from time to time. Each of the departments shall have the power to hear and determine causes and all questions arising therein. The presence of three judges shall be necessary to transact any business in either of the departments; except such as may be done in chambers and except as may be otherwise permitted by law. The opinions of a division or of a department of the court of appeals shall be in writing, the grounds stated, and shall be concurred in by a majority of a department if heard by a department or of the division if heard by the division. An opinion of a division or a department of a division shall be the opinion of the court of appeals.
B. The opinions of the court of appeals shall be published and distributed in the same manner as provided for the publication and distribution of opinions of the supreme court.
C. Not later than sixty days preceding the regular primary election for the retention of an appellate court judge, the commission on judicial performance review shall prepare and publish on its website a list of the decisions of that appellate court judge including the decision's official citation and an electronic copy of the entire text of the decision.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
6
cases, 1967–2009 · leading case:
State v. Patterson, 218 P.3d 1031 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2009).
State v. Patterson, 218 P.3d 1031 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2009).
· cites it 6× “Section 12-120.07, a related statute governing the publication of court of appeals decisions, reinforces this change.”
State v. Whipple, 866 P.2d 1358 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1993).
· cites it 2× “Ariz.Rev.Stat.Ann. § 12-120.07. Published opinions and memorandum decisions both satisfy the statute.”
Rager v. Superior Coach Sales & Serv. of Arizona, 516 P.2d 324 (Ariz. 1973).
· cites it 3× “A.R.S. § 12-120.07 provides: “The decisions of a division or of a department of the court of appeals shall be in writing, the grounds stated, and shall be concurred in by a majority of a department if heard by a department or of the division if heard by the division.”
McRae v. Forren, 428 P.2d 129 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1967).
· cites it 2× “” (Emphasis added) This court did not consider the minute entry quoted above as a “decision” within the purview of A.R.S. § 12-120.07, subsec. A, so that the decision was not published as are the formal written decisions of the court.”
City of Glendale v. Skok, 432 P.2d 597 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1967).
· cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 12-120.07. As such, they are subject to the parole evidence rule.”
Dickerson v. Indus. Comm'n, 516 P.2d 334 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1973).
· cites it 2× “The grant of authority contained in A.R.S. § 23-943 (F) is much broader than that given to the Court of Appeals by A.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-120.07(A) — 2 cases
State v. Patterson, 218 P.3d 1031 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2009).
“Section 12-120.07, a related statute governing the publication of court of appeals decisions, reinforces this change.”
Dickerson v. Indus. Comm'n, 516 P.2d 334 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1973).
“The grant of authority contained in A.R.S. § 23-943 (F) is much broader than that given to the Court of Appeals by A.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.