Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Mieg, 239 P.3d 1258.

32 citing documents.

State v. Qureshi Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
State v. Qureshi Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
P. 32.1(a); ¶ 12 (App. 2010) (Vindictive prosecution may violate due process.).
State v. Lohmeier Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
State v. Lohmeier Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
¶ 17 (2018) (failure to preserve evidence); ¶ 9 (App. 2010) (prosecutorial vindictiveness).
State v. Chambers Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
State v. Chambers Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
DISCUSSION I. The Superior Court did not Abuse its Discretion in Denying Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss and Request to Reinstate the Original Plea Offer ¶6 “We review rulings on motions to dismiss for vindictive prosecution for an abuse of discretion.” ¶ 9 (App. 2010).
State v. Mendoza 455 P.3d 705 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Mendoza 455 P.3d 705 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Timlick Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Timlick Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
¶ 10 (App. 2010) (prosecutor generally has broad discretion over charging decisions).
State v. Dansdill 443 P.3d 990 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2019
State v. Dansdill 443 P.3d 990 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2019
State v. Bush Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Bush Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Westerfield Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Distinguished State v. Westerfield Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Silva Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Silva Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
“If a defendant makes a prima facie showing that the charging decision is more ‘likely than not attributable to vindictiveness’ by the prosecutor, the burden shifts to the prosecutor to overcome the presumption ‘by objective evidence justifying the prosecutor’s action.’” ¶ 12 (App. 2010) (citations omitted).
State v. Leary Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Leary Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Horton Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Horton Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
is inherent in any prosecution.” ¶ 12, (citation omitted).
State v. Hollingsworth Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Distinguished State v. Hollingsworth Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Rodriguez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Rodriguez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Tacquard Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Tacquard Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
A court abuses its discretion when “the reasons given by the court for its action are clearly untenable, legally incorrect, or amount to a denial of justice.” ¶ 9 (App. 2010) (internal quotation and citation omitted).
State v. Twiggs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Twiggs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Lua Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Lua Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
He offers no “realistic likelihood of vindictiveness,” -49, ¶¶ 11-15, -62 (App. 2010), but only speculative claims about the prosecutor’s motives.

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by