Legal Opinion

Mahar v. Acuna, II

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided October 18, 2012No. 2 CA-CV 2012-0060PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

ECKERSTROM, Presiding Judge.

¶ 1 This appeal concerns an order restricting the right of the appellant, Hector Acuna, to possess a firearm. The trial court issued this formal order, which was entitled “Notice to Sheriff of Positive Brady Indicator” (here after “Brady notice”), 1 along with an order of protection in favor of the appellee, Gina Ma-har, after a hearing at which both parties testified. On appeal, Hector maintains the court erred by entering the Brady notice without finding a sufficient legal basis to support it. Because we agree the firearms restriction is either unsupported…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Department of Economic Security v. BurtonCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2003
  2. Hill v. City of PhoenixArizona Supreme Court · 1999
  3. LaFaro v. CahillCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2002
  4. United States v. SanchezCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
  5. Bell v. Smitty's Super Valu, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1995

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. City Center Executive Plaza, LLC v. JantzenCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2015
  2. Savord v. MortonCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2014
  3. Michaelson v. GarrCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2014
  4. In Re $15,379 in U.S. CurrencyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2016
  5. Moreno v. BeltranCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2020

13 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