Legal Opinion

State v. Burdick

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided January 14, 2005No. 2 CA-CR 2004-0043PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

HOWARD, Presiding Judge.

¶ 1 After a jury trial, appellant Andrew Burdick was convicted of four counts of disorderly conduct. The trial court sentenced him to four aggravated, 1.5-year prison terms, three of which were to be served consecutively. On appeal, he contends he committed only one act of disorderly conduct and, therefore, the consecutive sentences violate A.R.S. § 13-116 and the Double Jeopardy Clauses of the Arizona and United States Constitutions. Burdick further contends the trial court erred by imposing aggravated sentences without having a jury determine the aggravating…

2Cases cited28 opinions

  1. Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  2. Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  3. State v. RingArizona Supreme Court · 2003
  4. State v. HenleyArizona Supreme Court · 1984
  5. State v. SansingArizona Supreme Court · 2003

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. State of Arizona v. Matthew Erich ManzanedoCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2005
  2. State v. BurdickCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2005
  3. State v. BrownCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2005
  4. State v. CobbSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2006
  5. STATE OF ARIZONA v. JONATHAN McMULLENCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2005

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