Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Ross, 151 P.3d 1261.

48 citing documents.

Pima County v. State Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Pima County v. State Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
State v. Gomez 437 P.3d 896 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Gomez 437 P.3d 896 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
¶ 22 (App. 2007) (quotation omitted).
State v. Duarte 438 P.3d 707 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2018
State v. Duarte 438 P.3d 707 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2018
Montgomery v. Harris , , ¶ 13, ; State v. Ross , , ¶ 22
State v. Meeds 421 P.3d 653 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Meeds 421 P.3d 653 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
mbiguous or unclear, however, we attempt to determine legislative intent by interpreting the statutory scheme as a whole and consider the statute’s 9 STATE v. MEEDS Opinion of the Court context, subject matter, historical background, effects and consequences, and spirit and purpose.” ¶ 22 (App. 2007) (internal quotations and citations omitted).
State v. Kemmish 418 P.3d 1087 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Kemmish 418 P.3d 1087 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Timothy W. v. Department of Child Safety 377 P.3d 1026 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Timothy W. v. Department of Child Safety 377 P.3d 1026 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
¶ 21 (App. 2007) (“An abuse of discretion exists when the trial court 3 TIMOTHY W. v. DCS, M.W.
State v. Turner 372 P.3d 334 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Turner 372 P.3d 334 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
¶ 22 (App. 2007) ( ¶ 11 (2002)).
State v. Rodriguez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Rodriguez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State of Arizona v. Jerry Charles Holle 358 P.3d 639 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2015
State of Arizona v. Jerry Charles Holle 358 P.3d 639 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2015
State of Arizona v. Jeremy Allen Matlock 350 P.3d 835 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2015
State of Arizona v. Jeremy Allen Matlock 350 P.3d 835 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2015
State v. Kuzmanov Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Kuzmanov Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
“We review the trial court’s ruling on a motion for judgment of acquittal for an abuse of discretion.” ¶ 14, ¶ 21
Orca Communications Unlimited, LLC v. Noder 314 P.3d 89 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
Orca Communications Unlimited, LLC v. Noder 314 P.3d 89 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
State of Arizona v. Tynerial Ray Kindred 307 P.3d 1038 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2013
State of Arizona v. Tynerial Ray Kindred 307 P.3d 1038 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2013
State of Arizona v. Cooperman 282 P.3d 446 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
State of Arizona v. Cooperman 282 P.3d 446 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
State v. Ross, 214 Ariz. 280, ¶ 22
Ruben M. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 282 P.3d 437 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
Ruben M. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 282 P.3d 437 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
¶ 22 , , (when “statute’s meaning is plainly apparent from its language, we simply are not authorized to add anything to it unless an absurdity would otherwise result”).
State of Arizona v. Victor Manuel Rodriguez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2010
State of Arizona v. Victor Manuel Rodriguez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2010
(in analyzing statute, court should give meaning consistent with entire statutory scheme).
State of Arizona v. Jeffrey Lee Hinden Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2010
State of Arizona v. Jeffrey Lee Hinden Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2010
In Re Search Warrant No. 08 Sw 1417 233 P.3d 618 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2010
In Re Search Warrant No. 08 Sw 1417 233 P.3d 618 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2010
In RE MARRIAGE OF REEDER v. Johnson 227 P.3d 492 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
In RE MARRIAGE OF REEDER v. Johnson 227 P.3d 492 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
In Re Mh 2008-002659 226 P.3d 394 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
In Re Mh 2008-002659 226 P.3d 394 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
In analyzing a statute, we attempt to give it meaning consistent with “the statutory scheme as a whole.” ¶ 22 , ( ¶ 11 , ).
State v. LYCHWICK 218 P.3d 1061 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
State v. LYCHWICK 218 P.3d 1061 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Castro v. Ballesteros-Suarez 213 P.3d 197 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Castro v. Ballesteros-Suarez 213 P.3d 197 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Nowell v. Rees 199 P.3d 654 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
Nowell v. Rees 199 P.3d 654 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
Mathews v. Life Care Centers of America, Inc. 177 P.3d 867 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
Mathews v. Life Care Centers of America, Inc. 177 P.3d 867 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by