Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Burke v. SUPERIOR COURT, IN AND FOR COUNTY OF PIMA

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided July 21, 1966No. 2 CA-CIV 217Published

1ConcurrenceMolloy, Judge

(specially concurring).

I concur in the result reached and in general with the reasoning of the foregoing opinion. I am not, however, able to reconcile the result reached with the decision of State v. Essman, 98 Ariz. 228, 403 P.2d 540 (1965). Essman holds that a conviction in a criminal action, after a regularly and properly conducted jury trial, must be reversed because of the refusal of the magistrate conducting the preliminary hearing to permit the defendant to call witnesses, “ * * * including police officers who saw appellant on the night of his wife’s death and whose testimony on cross…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Griffin v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1956
  2. Douglas v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  3. Eskridge v. Washington State Board of Prison Terms & ParolesSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
  4. Valley Nat. Bank of Phoenix v. GloverArizona Supreme Court · 1945
  5. State v. EssmanArizona Supreme Court · 1965

10 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