Legal Opinion

State Ex Rel. Thomas v. Newell

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided June 2, 2009No. 1 CA-SA 09-0052PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

PORTLEY, Judge.

¶ 1 The issue in this special action is whether the trial court abused its discretion by ordering the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office (“State”) to disclose fingerprint and palm print analysis within twenty-one days as a sanction for untimely disclosure.

FACTS & PROCEDURAL HISTORY

¶ 2 At the initial pretrial conference (“IPTC”), the trial court was advised that the parties had exchanged their initial disclosures. The Defendant, however, indicated he had not received analysis of a palm print and fingerprints that were lifted at the scene of the armed robbery.

¶ 3 The trial…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Link v. Wabash RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
  2. State v. ChappleArizona Supreme Court · 1983
  3. United States v. GraceCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
  4. State v. RoqueArizona Supreme Court · 2006
  5. State v. HansenArizona Supreme Court · 2007

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. State v. TillmonCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2009
  2. Jimenez v. Hon. chavez/stateCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2014
  3. State of Arizona v. Brady Whitman Jr.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2013
  4. State v. SimonCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2012
  5. Mw2 Investments v. Imh SpecialCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2019

3 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