Legal Opinion

State v. Pinto

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided May 24, 1994No. 1 CA-CR 93-0485 to 1 CA-CR 93-0487 and 1 CA-CR 93-0628PublishedCited by 35 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

CONTRERAS, Judge.

Appellants Elizabeth Pinto, Nelson Yazzie, Titus Sehongva and Charles Capone (“defendants)”) appeal from the trial court’s orders entering separate civil judgments against them for the amounts of restitution remaining unpaid after the expiration of their respective terms of probation.

The primary issue raised by these consolidated appeals is whether Ariz.Rev.Stat.Ann. (“AR.S.”) section 13-805 allows the entry of such a judgment after the expiration of the period of probation, but before the full restitution amount has actually been paid. Defendant Sehongva also asks…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Gagnon v. ScarpelliSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  2. Chaparral Development v. RMED International, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1991
  3. Nichols v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1993
  4. Rutledge v. Arizona Board of RegentsCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1985
  5. State v. HelffrichCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1992

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

3Cited by35 opinions

  1. Haroutunian v. Valueoptions, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2008
  2. State v. LewandowskiCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2009
  3. State v. KorovkinCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2002
  4. Gray v. IrwinCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1999
  5. State v. RodgersCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1995

30 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