Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Morris, 839 P.2d 434.

41 citing documents.

State v. Davis Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
(“[R]estitution should be ordered for actual damages, that are the natural consequences of the defendant’s conduct or when the court determines that the losses were foreseeable, considering the nature and character of defendant’s criminal actions.”).
E. H. v. Hon. Slayton 568 P.3d 377 Ariz. 2025
E. H. v. Hon. Slayton 568 P.3d 377 Ariz. 2025
G.F. v. Hon. Nielson 556 P.3d 1220 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
G.F. v. Hon. Nielson 556 P.3d 1220 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
–18 (App. 1992) (directing courts to consider the “nature and character of the criminal activity”).
E.H. v. Hon Slayton Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
E.H. v. Hon Slayton Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Consequential damages “are such as are not produced without the concurrence of some other event attributable to the same origin or cause; such damage, loss, or injury as does not flow directly and immediately from the action of the party, but only from the consequences or results of such act.” (quoting 25 C.J.S.
State of Arizona v. Richard Allen Reed 502 P.3d 979 Ariz. 2022
State of Arizona v. Richard Allen Reed 502 P.3d 979 Ariz. 2022
der restitution for ‘damages that flow directly from the defendant’s criminal conduct, without the intervention of additional causative factors’” (quoting Wilkinson, 202 Ariz. at 29 ¶ 7), and describing unrecoverable consequential damages as losses “not flow[ing] directly and immediately from the action of the party, but only from the consequences or results of such act” ()); see also Ariz. Const. art. 2, § 2.1(A)(8) (guaranteeing “restitution from the person or persons convicted of the criminal
In Re Tommy G. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
In Re Tommy G. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
(quoting 25 C.J.S., Damages, § 2 at 617).
State v. Leal 455 P.3d 327 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Leal 455 P.3d 327 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
§ 13-603(C) to include insurer of burglary victim); (following Merrill and affirming, under A.R.S.
State v. Fernandez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Fernandez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Mercer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Mercer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
(requiring the restitution award to “bear[] a reasonable relationship to the victim’s loss” (citations omitted)).
State of Arizona v. Robert Leeroy Slover Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2009
State of Arizona v. Robert Leeroy Slover Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2009
In Re Andrew C. 160 P.3d 687 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
In Re Andrew C. 160 P.3d 687 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
Infra at ¶¶ 37-39, citing William L., 211 Ariz. at 239-40, ¶¶ 9-14 , 119 P.3d at 1042-43
In Re Ryan A. 39 P.3d 543 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2002
In Re Ryan A. 39 P.3d 543 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2002
State v. Wilkinson 10 P.3d 634 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
State v. Wilkinson 10 P.3d 634 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
State v. Lindsley 953 P.2d 1248 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
State v. Lindsley 953 P.2d 1248 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
Little v. Superior Court 884 P.2d 214 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
Little v. Superior Court 884 P.2d 214 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
State v. Carbajal 868 P.2d 1044 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
State v. Carbajal 868 P.2d 1044 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
State v. Barrett 864 P.2d 1078 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
State v. Barrett 864 P.2d 1078 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
State v. Sexton 859 P.2d 794 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
State v. Sexton 859 P.2d 794 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
State v. Blanton 844 P.2d 1167 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
State v. Blanton 844 P.2d 1167 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
State v. Baltzell 857 P.2d 1291 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
State v. Baltzell 857 P.2d 1291 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
See Wideman, 165 Ariz. at 369 , 798 P.2d at 1378 (restitution allowed for costs of mental health counseling for the family of a murder victim allowed); , (restitution allowed for costs of moving to restore victim’s mental health); , (restitution allowed for rental cars, taxi fare, and calls to insurance company in case where victim’s car had been damaged).
State v. Steffy 839 P.2d 1135 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
State v. Steffy 839 P.2d 1135 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992