Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Hamilton, 735 P.2d 854.

68 citing documents.

State v. Eskivel Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Eskivel Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
(stating defendant not entitled to credit for day sentence is imposed if it is the first day of defendant’s sentence).
State v. Maldonado Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Maldonado Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
¶6 Presentence incarceration credit is given for time spent in custody beginning on the day of booking, and ending on the day before sentencing
Soto v. Superior Court 949 P.2d 539 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
Soto v. Superior Court 949 P.2d 539 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
State v. Carnegie 850 P.2d 690 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
State v. Carnegie 850 P.2d 690 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
State v. Snider 835 P.2d 495 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
State v. Snider 835 P.2d 495 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
“Credit for presentence incarceration is rooted in the equal protection principle that defendants unable to make bail should not serve longer in custody than those financially able to make bail.” Clements, 161 Ariz. at 126 , 776 P.2d at 804 ( , ).
State v. Clements 776 P.2d 801 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
State v. Clements 776 P.2d 801 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
State v. Ritch 774 P.2d 234 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
State v. Ritch 774 P.2d 234 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
State v. Cuen 761 P.2d 160 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
State v. Cuen 761 P.2d 160 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
-601 , -69 (1977), and citing State v. Sutton, 21 Ariz.App.
State v. Lopez 736 P.2d 369 Ariz. 1987
State v. Lopez 736 P.2d 369 Ariz. 1987
the court arrived at the same conclusion that we now approve.