Legal Opinion

State v. Smith

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided June 20, 1985No. 1 CA-CR 8452PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

LIVERMORE, Judge.

Defendant was convicted of sexual assault, burglary, and aggravated assault. These convictions were reversed because a defense witness had been inappropriately precluded as a discovery sanction. State v. Smith, 140 Ariz. 355, 681 P.2d 1374 (1983). On remand, he was again convicted and sentenced to prison for thirty-six years.

Defendant first contends that the speedy trial limits of Rule 8, Rules of Criminal Procedure, 17 A.R.S., were violated. Rule 8.2(d) requires that retrial occur within sixty days of the filing of an appellate mandate. The mandate in this case was…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. State v. DessureaultArizona Supreme Court · 1969
  2. State v. ArnettArizona Supreme Court · 1978
  3. State v. ZaragozaArizona Supreme Court · 1983
  4. State v. SmithArizona Supreme Court · 1984
  5. State v. TuckerArizona Supreme Court · 1982

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. State v. ClarkCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1999
  2. Shepherd v. FahringerArizona Supreme Court · 1988
  3. State v. LongCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1986
  4. Lee v. Allstate InsuranceDistrict Court, D. Nevada · 1986
  5. State ex rel. Romley v. Superior CourtArizona Supreme Court · 1989

4 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