Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

State v. Diaz

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided May 29, 2009No. 2 CA-CR 2008-0051Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

HOWARD, Judge,

specially concurring in part and dissenting in part.

¶ 15 I concur with the majority that the state waited too long to present this court with a complete factual record. See State v. Esquer, 26 Ariz.App. 572, 573-74, 550 P.2d 240, 241-42 (1976), rejected on other grounds by State v. Lopez, 27 Ariz.App. 626, 557 P.2d 558 (1976). But we now have conclusive proof that the legal principle on which the original opinion in this matter is based is erroneous and should be reconsidered. See In re Dean, 212 Ariz. 221, ¶ 1, 129 P.3d 943, 943 (2006) (court must sometimes “confront the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State v. HendersonArizona Supreme Court · 2005
  2. Buzard v. GriffinArizona Supreme Court · 1960
  3. State v. EsquerCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1976
  4. State v. LopezCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1976
  5. In Re DeanArizona Supreme Court · 2006

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API