State v. Botkin
Arizona Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HURWITZ, Justice.
¶ 1 If a criminal defendant is eligible for probation, the superior court may suspend imposition of sentence and “place the person on intensive probation.” A.R.S. § 13-90KA) (Supp.2008); see A.R.S. § 13-913 (2001) (defining “intensive probation” as “a program ... of highly structured and closely supervised probation which emphasizes the payment of restitution”). Upon notice to the State and any victim, see A.R.S. § 13-901(E), the court “may at any time modify the level of supervision of a person granted intensive probation, or may transfer the person to supervised…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Boykin v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- City of Tucson v. Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc.Arizona Supreme Court · 2005
- In Re Pima County Juvenile Appeal No. 74802-2Arizona Supreme Court · 1990
- State v. GetzArizona Supreme Court · 1997
- State v. WhiteArizona Supreme Court · 1977
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- State v. PiotrowskiCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2014
- In re Thomas D.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2012