Hare v. SUPER. COURT, IN AND FOR CTY. OF PIMA
Arizona Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
CAMERON, Justice.
Petitioner, Pamela Marie Hare, brings this special action proceeding to challenge the trial court’s refusal to consider the plea agreement she reached with the Pima County Attorney. We accepted jurisdiction pursuant to Rule 8, Rules of Procedure for Special Actions, 17A A.R.S., and Ariz.Const. art. 6, § 5, because it is a matter of concern in the administration of justice and because there is no plain, speedy, or adequate remedy by appeal.
The sole issue which we must decide is whether the Pima County Superior Court exceeded its jurisdiction by adopting a rule that after the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Bordenkircher v. HayesSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- State v. MorseArizona Supreme Court · 1980
- State v. BlazakArizona Supreme Court · 1969
- Anderson v. PickrellArizona Supreme Court · 1977
- SCHOOL DIST. NO. 26 (BOUSE ELEM.) OF YUMA CO. v. StrohmArizona Supreme Court · 1970
3Cited by24 opinions
- State v. LambrightArizona Supreme Court · 1983
- Hedlund v. SheldonArizona Supreme Court · 1992
- State v. HagerSupreme Court of Iowa · 2001
- Espinoza v. MartinArizona Supreme Court · 1995
- Bergeron Ex Rel. Perez v. O'NEILCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2003
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.