Legal Opinion
Smith v. SUPERIOR COURT, ETC.
Arizona Supreme Court
Decided October 14, 1981No. 15426-PRPublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HOLOHAN, Vice Chief Justice.
The petitioner filed a petition for special action in Division Two of the Court of Appeals seeking to require the respondent judge to impose the sentence contained in the plea agreement which had been accepted by the respondent judge. The Court of Appeals granted the relief sought in an order dated March 18, 1981. We treated the order as a per curiam memorandum opinion and granted the respondents’ petition for review. The decision and order of the Court of Appeals is vacated.
The only question presented for determination is whether a trial judge, without the consent…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- North Carolina v. PearceSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- United States v. DiFrancescoSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- State v. SUPERIOR COURT, ETC.Arizona Supreme Court · 1980
- Lombrano v. SUPERIOR COURT, ETC.Arizona Supreme Court · 1980
3Cited by18 opinions
- John Harvey Adamson v. James G. Ricketts, Director, Arizona Department of CorrectionsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1988
- State v. De NistorArizona Supreme Court · 1985
- Aragon v. WilkinsonCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2004
- Dominguez v. MeehanCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1983
- State v. DarelliCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2003
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.