14 Arizona opinions name it 2 courts 1966–2021 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Arizona courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Cummings v. Cummingsgreen2 sentences2021“The crucial inquiry is whether the parent received ‘actual money or cash-like benefits . . . available for expenditures.’” Id. (citing Cummings v. Cummings, 182 Ariz. 383, 385 (App. 1994)). 2016The crucial inquiry is whether the parent received “actual money or cash-like benefits ... available for expenditures.” Cummings, 182 Ariz. at 385 , 897 P.2d 685 . | 1 | 2 |
People v. Mattsongreen2 sentences1968While counsel’s failure to investigate available defenses, which results in withdrawing a crucial defense from the case, has been held to be a deprivation of assistance of counsel, People v. Mattson, 51 Cal.2d 777 , 336 P.2d 937 (1959), the appellants did not indicate in their petition any dereliction in this regard. 1968While counsel’s failure to investigate available defenses, which results in withdrawing a crucial defense from the case, has been held to be a deprivation of assistance of counsel, People v. Mattson, 51 Cal.2d 777 , 336 P.2d 937 (1959), the appellants did not indicate in their petition any dereliction in this regard. | 1 | 2 |
State v. Salazargreen2 sentences2015“If the evidence shows a defendant’s manner of leaving the scene of a crime reveals a consciousness of guilt, even in the absence of pursuit, an instruction on flight is permissible.” State v. Salazar, 173 Ariz. 399, 409 , 844 P.2d 566, 576 (1992). 2015“If the evidence shows a defendant’s manner of leaving the scene of a crime reveals a consciousness of guilt, even in the absence of pursuit, an instruction on flight is permissible.” State v. Salazar, 173 Ariz. 399, 409 , 844 P.2d 566, 576 (1992). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Detrichgreen2 sentences1997In this case, the crucial inquiry is whether the unlawful imprisonment was accompanied by one of the enumerated mental states in the kidnapping statute, including intent to "inflict death, physical injury or a sexual offense on the victim, or to otherwise aid in the commission of a felony." A.R.S. § 13-1304(A)(3); see Detrich, 178 Ariz. at 383 , 873 P.2d at 1305 . 1997In this case, the crucial inquiry is whether the unlawful imprisonment was accompanied by one of the enumerated mental states in the kidnapping statute, including intent to "inflict death, physical injury or a sexual offense on the victim, or to otherwise aid in the commission of a felony." A.R.S. § 13-1304(A)(3); see Detrich, 178 Ariz. at 383 , 873 P.2d at 1305 . | 1 | 1 |
Standard Pressed Steel Co. v. Department of Revenue of Wash.green2 sentences1985The crucial test is “whether the state [or city] has given anything for which it can ask return.” Standard Pressed Steel Co. v. Wash. Dept. of Rev., 419 U.S. 560, 561 , 95 S.Ct. 706, 708 , 42 L.Ed.2d 719, 722 (1975); citing Wisconsin v. J.C. 1985The crucial test is “whether the state [or city] has given anything for which it can ask return.” Standard Pressed Steel Co. v. Wash. Dept. of Rev., 419 U.S. 560, 561 , 95 S.Ct. 706, 708 , 42 L.Ed.2d 719, 722 (1975); citing Wisconsin v. J.C. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Arizona. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Lopez
green
2 sentences1978In State v. Lopez, 3 Ariz.App. 200 , 412 P.2d 882 (1966), upon which appellant relies, we stated: “It is counsel’s duty to investigate carefully all defenses of fact and of law that may be available to the defendant, and if his failure to do so results in withdrawing a crucial defense from the case, the defendant has not had the assistance to which he is entitled, [citation omitted].” 3 Ariz.App. at 204 , 412 P.2d at 886 . 1978In State v. Lopez, 3 Ariz.App. 200 , 412 P.2d 882 (1966), upon which appellant relies, we stated: “It is counsel’s duty to investigate carefully all defenses of fact and of law that may be available to the defendant, and if his failure to do so results in withdrawing a crucial defense from the case, the defendant has not had the assistance to which he is entitled, [citation omitted].” 3 Ariz.App. at 204 , 412 P.2d at 886 . | 3 | 1970–1981 |
Sherman v. Sherman
green
1 sentence2021“The crucial inquiry is whether the parent received ‘actual money or cash-like benefits . . . available for expenditures.’” Id. (citing Cummings v. Cummings, 182 Ariz. 383, 385 (App. 1994)). | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co.
green
2 sentences2015Id. at 22 , 110 S.Ct. 2695 ; Turner, 174 Ariz. at 207 , 848 P.2d 286 . 2015Id. at 22 , 110 S.Ct. 2695 ; Turner, 174 Ariz. at 207 , 848 P.2d 286 . | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Turner v. Devlin
green
2 sentences2015Id. at 22 , 110 S.Ct. 2695 ; Turner, 174 Ariz. at 207 , 848 P.2d 286 . 2015Id. at 22 , 110 S.Ct. 2695 ; Turner, 174 Ariz. at 207 , 848 P.2d 286 . | 1 | 2015–2015 |
State v. Miranda
green
1 sentence2015The crucial inquiry is whether Satovich engaged in some kind of “eluding behavior” that was “designed to camouflage his participation in a crime” which manifested a “consciousness of guilt.” Id. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Kuhnle Brothers, Inc. v. County of Geauga
green
1 sentence2014Appellants’ also cite Kuhnle, 103 F.3d at 522 , in support of their continuing violations argument. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
California v. Kinder Morgan Energy Partners, L.P.
green
1 sentence2014Evaluating whether the statute of limitations barred a nuisance claim, the court relied on the difference between “permanent” and “continuing” nuisances where “the crucial test 7 ANDERSON et al. v. PRESCOTT Decision of the Court for a continuing nuisance is whether an offensive condition can be discontinued or abated at any time,” concluding “Plaintiffs’ allegations that Defendants’ actions are abatable at any time are crucial.” Id. at 1085-86 . | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Bell v. Wolfish
green
2 sentences2007In Bell, 441 U.S. at 537-38 , 99 S.Ct. 1861 the Supreme Court held that to determine the "distinction between punitive measures that may not constitutionally be imposed prior to a determination of guilt and regulatory restraints that may," the crucial inquiry is *1273 whether "the relevant disability is imposed for the purpose of punishment or whether it is but an incident of some other legitimate governmental purpose." The legislative history of Proposition 100 and the Guide presented to voters reflect that it was not intended to punish illegal aliens but rather as a means to prevent illegal 2007In Bell, 441 U.S. at 537-38 , 99 S.Ct. 1861 the Supreme Court held that to determine the "distinction between punitive measures that may not constitutionally be imposed prior to a determination of guilt and regulatory restraints that may," the crucial inquiry is *1273 whether "the relevant disability is imposed for the purpose of punishment or whether it is but an incident of some other legitimate governmental purpose." The legislative history of Proposition 100 and the Guide presented to voters reflect that it was not intended to punish illegal aliens but rather as a means to prevent illegal | 1 | 2007–2007 |
State v. Lemieux
green
2 sentences1992The court had little more in State v. Lemieux , in which defense counsel reported the misunderstanding to the court and defendant— not under oath—simply confirmed that the attorney’s statement was correct. 137 Ariz. at 145 , 669 P.2d at 123 . 1992The court had little more in State v. Lemieux , in which defense counsel reported the misunderstanding to the court and defendant— not under oath—simply confirmed that the attorney’s statement was correct. 137 Ariz. at 145 , 669 P.2d at 123 . | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Wisconsin v. J. C. Penney Co.
green
2 sentences1985Penney Co., 311 U.S. 435 , 61 S.Ct. 246 , 85 L.Ed. 267 , 130 L.R.A. 1229 (1940). 1985Penney Co., 311 U.S. 435 , 61 S.Ct. 246 , 85 L.Ed. 267 , 130 L.R.A. 1229 (1940). | 1 | 1985–1985 |
People v. Ibarra
green
2 sentences1970In Lopez , and in People v. Ibarra, 60 Cal.2d 460 , 34 Cal.Rptr. 863 , 386 P.2d 487 (1963), cited in Lopez, the trial record itself disclosed counsel’s dereliction in withdrawing a crucial defense. 1970In Lopez , and in People v. Ibarra, 60 Cal.2d 460 , 34 Cal.Rptr. 863 , 386 P.2d 487 (1963), cited in Lopez, the trial record itself disclosed counsel’s dereliction in withdrawing a crucial defense. | 1 | 1970–1970 |
In Re Smiley
green
2 sentences1970In re Smiley, 66 Cal.2d 606 , 58 Cal.Rptr. 579 , 427 P.2d 179 (1967). 1970In re Smiley, 66 Cal.2d 606 , 58 Cal.Rptr. 579 , 427 P.2d 179 (1967). | 1 | 1970–1970 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.