Legal Opinion

Frank Hoffman v. Hon. chandler/state

Arizona Supreme Court

Decided March 5, 2013No. CV-12-0149-PRPublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

TIMMER, Justice.

¶ 1 Subsection (A)(3) of A.R.S. § 13-1033 authorizes a defendant to appeal a post-judgment order that affects substantial rights, while subsection (B) prohibits a defendant in noncapital cases from directly appealing any judgment or sentence entered pursuant to a plea agreement. We today hold that subsection (B) bars a defendant from directly appealing a contested post-judgment restitution order entered pursuant to a plea agreement that contemplated payment of restitution up to a capped amount. Any appellate review must be obtained through post-conviction relief…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Kent K. v. Bobby M.Arizona Supreme Court · 2005
  2. State v. SmithArizona Supreme Court · 1996
  3. State v. EstradaArizona Supreme Court · 2001
  4. State v. WagstaffArizona Supreme Court · 1990
  5. State of Arizona v. Manuel Ovante, Jr.Arizona Supreme Court · 2013

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Diana Glazer v. State of ArizonaArizona Supreme Court · 2015
  2. State of Arizona v. David Lee GreenArizona Supreme Court · 2020
  3. E. H. v. Hon. slayton/stateArizona Supreme Court · 2020
  4. State of Arizona v. Reuben Renee CotaCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2014
  5. Hogue v. City of PhoenixCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2016

8 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