Legal Opinion
Taylor v. Cruikshank
Court of Appeals of Arizona
Decided November 30, 2006No. 2 CA-SA 2006-0067, 2 CA-SA 2006-0078PublishedCited by 24 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ECKERSTROM, Presiding Judge.
¶ 1 In separate special action proceedings that we have consolidated sua sponte, petitioners Olin Gene Taylor and John Adrian Johnson seek special action relief from the respondent judges’ denial of their motions to dismiss the indictments filed against them in their underlying criminal cases. In their motions, Taylor and Johnson asserted the state lacks jurisdiction to try them on the charges because the applicable limitation period has expired. We reluctantly agree.
Jurisdiction
¶ 2 The issue presented is appropriate for the exercise of our special action…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- United States v. MarionSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Toussie v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Wood v. CarpenterSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
- City of Tucson v. Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc.Arizona Supreme Court · 2005
- State v. FellCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2002
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- State of Iowa v. Eddie TiptonSupreme Court of Iowa · 2017
- Cicoria v. ColeCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2009
- Democratic Party of Pima County v. Beth Ford Pima County Board of SupervisorsCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2012
- State v. AguilarCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2008
- Arpaio v. Citizen Publishing Co.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2008
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.