Legal Opinion

Nowell v. Rees

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided July 31, 2008No. 1 CA-SA 08-0102PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

IRVINE, Presiding Judge.

¶ 1 Aaron Jaydon Nowell (“Nowell”) contends that the trial efforts to restore his competency to stand trial proved unsuccessful. The issue we must decide is whether Arizona Revised Statutes (“A.R.S.”) sections 13-4501 through -4517 (2001 and Supp. 2007) 1 and Rules 11.1 through 11.6 of the Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure limit restoration efforts to the twenty-one months after a criminal defendant is first found to be incompetent. For the following reasons, we hold that the plain language of the statutes and rules limits the trial court’s authority to order…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Fragoso v. FellCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2005
  2. Hughes v. JorgensonArizona Supreme Court · 2002
  3. State v. RossCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2007
  4. Taylor v. CruikshankCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2006
  5. State Ex Rel. McDougall v. Superior CourtCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1996

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. State of Arizona v. Anthony LewisCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2014
  2. State v. SilvaCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2009
  3. In re MH 2008-000028Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2009
  4. In Re Eddie O.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2011
  5. Rider v. GarciaCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2013

5 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