green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
15.9 score
“to determine the intent of the electorate, courts may also look to the publicity pamphlet distributed at the time of the election.”
Treatment trajectory · 2010 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2010
2018
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
State of Arizona v. Jeremy Allen Matlock
to determine the intent of the electorate, courts may also look to the publicity pamphlet distributed at the time of the election.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Coconino Community v. the Property Tax
Club v. Hobbs, 253 Ariz. 478 , 482, ¶ 10 (2022); In re Drummond, 257 Ariz. 15 , 18, ¶ 5 (2024), and unless ambiguous, apply it without resorting to other means of textual construction, Heath v. Kiger, 217 Ariz. 492, 494, ¶ 6 (2008); In re Drummond, 257 Ariz at 18, ¶ 5. ¶10 In interpreting statutory and constitutional provisions, we do so not in isolation but in context with other provisions covering the same subject matter.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Coconino Community v. the Property Tax
Club v. Hobbs, 253 Ariz. 478 , 482, ¶ 10 (2022); In re Drummond, 257 Ariz. 15 , 18, ¶ 5 (2024), and unless ambiguous, apply it without resorting to other means of textual construction, Heath v. Kiger, 217 Ariz. 492, 494, ¶ 6 (2008); In re Drummond, 257 Ariz at 18, ¶ 5. ¶10 In interpreting statutory and constitutional provisions, we do so not in isolation but in context with other provisions covering the same subject matter.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Torres Moreno
(2×)
“Ambiguity occurs when uncertainty exists about the meaning or interpretation of a provision’s terms.” Heath v. Kiger, 217 Ariz. 492, 494, ¶ 6 (2008) (citing Hayes v. Cont’l Ins.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Brewer v. Rees
We conclude that the holding in Heath — that “the phrase ‘admitted to bail’ includes those defendants released on their own recognizance” — necessarily also includes defendants released on their own recognizance pursuant to a deferred prosecution agreement. 217 Ariz. at 497, ¶ 16, 176 P.3d at 695. ¶ 10 As to Brewer’s argument regarding his right to a hearing, Brewer admits that he did not request a Simpson 2 hearing to contest the trial court’s bail determination in the 2010 ease. 3 Brewer argues such a request was not necessary because he was “entitled to bail as a matter …
cited
Cited "see"
Arizonans for Second Chances v. Hobbs
See Heath v. Kiger, 217 Ariz. 492 , 494 ¶ 6 (2008); Kromko v. Superior Court, 168 Ariz. 51 , 57–58 (1991).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
James Morreno v. Hon. brickner/state/montgomery
The 1970 publicity pamphlet for Proposition 100 indicates that the purpose of the proposed amendment was to address the "rapidly increasing crime rate in Arizona" caused by "repeat offenders ... who continue their lives of crime while out on bail, awaiting trial." Ariz. Sec'y of State, Referendum and Initiative Publicity Pamphlet 3 (1970), http://azmemory.azlibrary.gov/cdm/compoundobject/collection/statepubs/id/10654; see also Heath , 217 Ariz. at 496 ¶ 14, 176 P.3d at 694 (recognizing Proposition 100's "purpose is to prevent those charged with felonies but released pending trial from committ…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
STATE of Arizona
v.
Hon. Howard FELL/Angela Frye
v.
Hon. Howard FELL/Angela Frye
No. CV-07-0389-PR.
Arizona Supreme Court.
Feb 12, 2008.
Published
Citer courts: Court of Appeals of Arizona (1)
¶ 1. ORDERED: Petition for Review of a Special Action Decision of the Court of Appeals (Oral Argument Requested) = DENIED.
¶ 2. FURTHER ORDERED: The Court of Appeals’ Opinion shall not be published, pursuant to Rule 111(g), Arizona Rules of the Supreme Court.