Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

State v. Rowan

Arizona Supreme Court

Decided September 30, 1993No. CR-92-0495-PRPublished

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partFeldman, Chief Justice

I concur with the decision to vacate that portion of the court of appeals’ opinion holding that the trial court insufficiently advised Defendant of the consequences of his admission to a prior felony conviction. I dissent, however, from the majority’s dismissal of the cross-petition for review.

There was little evidence to convict Defendant of knowingly operating or maintaining a prostitution enterprise. The record here simply shows that Defendant worked at the beeper service, took the call, arranged for a paid “full body massage,” drove a woman co-employee to the motel, and let her out of the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. State v. RowanCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1992

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

Powered by the Exa API