Legal Opinion

Crosby-Garbotz v. Fell

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided December 29, 2017No. 2 CA-SA 2017-0072PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

STARING, Presiding Judge:

¶ 1 In this special action, we conclude the doctrine of collateral estoppel, also *1114known as issue preclusion, does not bar the State of Arizona from prosecuting a person for child abuse after a juvenile court found in a separate dependency action that he did not abuse the child in question and dismissed a dependency petition that was based solely on that alleged abuse. Consequently, the respondent judge did not err in denying petitioner Nikolas Crosby-Garbotz's2 motion to dismiss the underlying criminal action.

Factual and Procedural Background

¶ 2 The following facts…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Allen v. McCurrySupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  2. Burks v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  3. Ashe v. SwensonSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  4. Kremer v. Chemical Construction Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
  5. Yates v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1957

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Crosby-Garbotz v. Hon. fell/stateArizona Supreme Court · 2019

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

Powered by the Exa API