Legal Opinion

State v. Snider

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided July 23, 1992No. 1 CA-CR 90-1255, 1 CA-CR 90-1256PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

FIDEL, Chief Judge.

Appellant Guy Snider (defendant), found to have violated the terms of his probation, was reinstated on probation but required to serve a year in jail. On appeal defendant alleges that the trial court erred 1) by permitting the State to introduce unreliable hearsay at his violation hearing, and 2) by imposing a full year’s probationary jail term without crediting the time defendant had spent in custody awaiting violation hearing and disposition.

FACTS

Defendant was serving probationary terms for a pair of drug offenses when the underlying violation proceedings…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. State v. BrownCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1975
  2. State v. HamiltonCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1987
  3. State v. BrownArizona Supreme Court · 1975
  4. State v. RiveraArizona Supreme Court · 1977
  5. State v. MathieuCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1990

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. State v. CarrCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2007
  2. State v. SanchezCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1997
  3. State v. PortisCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1996
  4. In re Jonah T.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1999
  5. State of Arizona v. Eddie Brian CarrCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2007

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API