Legal Opinion

State v. Payne

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided July 24, 2009No. 2 CA-CR 2008-0166, 2 CA-CR 2008-0171, 2 CA-CR 2008-0309PublishedCited by 32 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

PELANDER, Judge.

¶ 1 These three consolidated appeals present a common issue of first impression and statewide importance: may a superior court impose on a convicted felon at sentencing a “prosecution fee” pursuant to a county ordinance? In each of the three eases, pursuant to Pinal County Ordinance 91097-PS, the trial court assessed against the defendant a discretionary $1,000 prosecution fee that is payable to the county and deposited to a fund that directly benefits the Pinal County Attorney’s Office.

¶ 2 On appeal, defendants/appellants Stetson Payne, Channtell Nelson, and Susan…

2Cases cited68 opinions

  1. State v. HendersonArizona Supreme Court · 2005
  2. People v. JonesIllinois Supreme Court · 2006
  3. Hayes v. Continental InsuranceArizona Supreme Court · 1994
  4. Janson v. ChristensenArizona Supreme Court · 1991
  5. Zamora v. ReinsteinArizona Supreme Court · 1996

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

3Cited by32 opinions

  1. State of Arizona v. Nelson Ivan Boteo-FloresCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2012
  2. Azore, LLC v. BassettCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2014
  3. State v. KinneyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2010
  4. State v. McDonaghCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2013
  5. State of Arizona v. Reuben Renee CotaCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2014

27 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