Legal Opinion

State v. Hinden

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided June 4, 2010No. 2 CA-CR 2009-0111PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

ECKERSTROM, Presiding Judge.

¶ 1 After a jury trial, appellant Jeffrey Hinden was convicted of third-degree burglary pursuant to A.R.S. § 13-1506(A)(1). The trial court sentenced him to a mitigated term of 1.5 years’ imprisonment. On appeal, he argues the state presented insufficient evidence to support his conviction because it failed to prove the property he had entered was a “fenced commercial yard” as defined in A.R.S. § 13-1501(4). 1 For the following reasons, we agree and vacate his conviction.

Factual and Procedural Background

¶ 2 We view the evidence in the light most favorable to…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Janson v. ChristensenArizona Supreme Court · 1991
  2. State v. WilliamsArizona Supreme Court · 1993
  3. State v. JonesArizona Supreme Court · 1980
  4. State Ex Rel. Morrison v. AnwayArizona Supreme Court · 1960
  5. State v. CoxArizona Supreme Court · 2007

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

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. State of Arizona v. Robert Francisco BorquezCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2013
  2. State v. BoldingCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2011
  3. State v. MohajerinCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2010
  4. State of Arizona v. Anthony LewisCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2014
  5. State of Arizona v. Joann BonCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2014

12 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