Legal Opinion

State v. Quinonez

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided February 25, 1999No. 1CA-CR98-0200PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

NOYES, Judge.

¶ 1 Humberto Quinonez (“Defendant”) appeals from convictions and sentences for manslaughter, a class 2 felony, and aggravated assault, a class 3 felony, in violation of Arizona Revised Statutes Annotated (“A.R.S.”) sections 13-1103 and 13-1204(A)(1) (Supp.1998). The jury found that the offenses were dangerous and the trial court found that they were repetitive. In answer to the main question presented, we hold that A.R.S. section 13-604(P) (Supp.1998) is constitutional. This statute provides that an allegation of historical prior felony conviction is decided by the court.

I

¶…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Oregon v. HassSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  2. United States v. Joseph Samuel Kinsey, United States of America v. Albert KinseyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1988
  3. State v. FurthWashington Supreme Court · 1940
  4. State v. HurleyArizona Supreme Court · 1987
  5. State v. LaughterCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1980

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. State v. CanezArizona Supreme Court · 2002
  2. State v. CañezArizona Supreme Court · 2002
  3. David Leon Stokes, II v. Dora B. Schriro, DirectorCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
  4. Newkirk v. NothwehrCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2005
  5. Stokes v. SchriroCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006

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

Powered by the Exa API