Legal Opinion

State v. Tackman

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided December 1, 1994No. 1 CA-CR 92-1263, 1 CA-CR 92-1297 and 1 CA-CR 92-1316PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

McGREGOR, Presiding Judge.

In this appeal, we consider whether a superior court judge has authority to appoint a special master to recommend factual findings related to restitution and, if so, whether a defendant possesses a right to a peremptory change of the special master appointed. We have jurisdiction under Arizona Revised Statutes Annotated (“A.R.S.”) sections 12-120.21 (1992), 13-4031 (1989), and 13-4033 (Supp. 1993). For the reasons that follow, we affirm.

I

Timothy Eugene Tackman and Scott Alan Tackman (appellants) pled guilty to one count each of trafficking in stolen property,…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Hedlund v. SheldonArizona Supreme Court · 1992
  2. State v. FancherCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1991
  3. State v. ScrogginsCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1991
  4. State v. BarnesCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1978
  5. State v. LewusCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1992

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. ChartOne, Inc. v. BerniniCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2004
  2. Medders v. ConlogueCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2004
  3. Edward P. Bolding v. State of ArizonaCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2006
  4. BNSF Railway Co. v. ButtrickCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2011
  5. Chartone, Inc. v. Mercaldo, Ltd. Webb, Pc. Durazzo & Eckel Smart ProfessionalCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2004

2 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