Legal Opinion · Dissent

State Ex Rel. Dean v. Dolny

Arizona Supreme Court

Decided June 15, 1989No. CV-88-0272-PRPublished

1DissentCorcoran, Justice

I respectfully dissent. Because I believe that defendants are not entitled to jury trials under either the federal constitution or the Arizona constitution, I would affirm the court of appeals’ decision.

1. Federal law

In Blanton v. City of North Las Vegas, — U.S.-, 109 S.Ct. 1289, 103 L.Ed.2d 550 (1989), the Supreme Court held that persons charged under Nevada law with driving under the influence of alcohol are not entitled to jury trials. Under Nevada law, first-time DUI offenders face up to 6 months in jail and must pay a fine of up to $1,000—the same penalties imposable on persons convicted…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Baldwin v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  2. Blanton v. City of North Las VegasSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  3. District of Columbia v. ColtsSupreme Court of the United States · 1930
  4. Goldman v. KautzArizona Supreme Court · 1975
  5. O'NEILL v. MangumArizona Supreme Court · 1968

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

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

Powered by the Exa API