Legal Opinion

State v. Pizel

Court of Appeals of Utah

Decided September 30, 1999No. 981684-CAPublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

DAVIS, Judge:

¶ 1 Defendant John Paul Pizel appeals the order of the trial court finding that he violated the terms of his probation, revoking and reinstating that probation, and imposing two concurrent sixty-day jail terms. Pizel argues that evidence of the violation was obtained in contravention of his constitutional rights. We affirm.

BACKGROUND

¶ 2 In 1996, Pizel pleaded guilty to a class A misdemeanor charge of attempting to alter a prescription for a controlled substance, received a suspended sentence, and was placed on probation. Pizel subsequently violated the terms of this…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Pennsylvania Bd. of Probation and Parole v. ScottSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
  2. Orton v. CarterUtah Supreme Court · 1998
  3. State v. BrandleyCourt of Appeals of Utah · 1998
  4. State v. BeanCourt of Appeals of Utah · 1994
  5. State v. JarmanCourt of Appeals of Utah · 1999

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Salt Lake City v. JaramilloCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2007
  2. A.C.C. v. StateCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2000
  3. Salt Lake City v. JaramilloCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2007

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

Powered by the Exa API