Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Lindsley, 953 P.2d 1248.

49 citing documents.

State v. Perez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
State v. Perez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
In Re Delinquency of A.S. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
In Re Delinquency of A.S. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
The superior court retains broad discretion to make victims whole, ¶ 9 (App. 2021), and we will uphold the court’s award if it bears a reasonable relationship to the victim’s loss
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
(affirming restitution award of victim’s lost wages incurred to attend trial); ¶ 10 (App. 2004) (concluding victims’ travel expenses to attend trial can be ordered as restitution).
State v. Bartik Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
State v. Bartik Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
(requiring restitution for loss resulting from a defendant’s possession of stolen property, despite never being charged with theft).
In Re Brigham H. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
In Re Brigham H. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
We will uphold a restitution award if it “bears a reasonable relationship to the victim’s loss.”
In Re Tommy G. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
In Re Tommy G. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
We will uphold a restitution award if it “bears a reasonable relationship to the victim’s loss.”
E.H. v. Hon Slayton 491 P.3d 396 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
E.H. v. Hon Slayton 491 P.3d 396 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
¶10 “Restitution of full economic loss to a victim of a crime is mandatory under our sentencing statutes.” (citing A.R.S.
State v. Bartels Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State v. Bartels Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
-97 (App. 1997) (affirming restitution award for a wallet that was rendered unusable by odor caused when the defendant stored the wallet with marijuana); see also Linares, 241 Ariz. at 419, ¶ 10 ("The key to the [restitution] analysis is reasonableness[.]").
State v. Haver Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Haver Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
(we will uphold a restitution order “if it bears a reasonable relationship to the victim’s loss”).
D.D. v. Hon granville/simpson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
D.D. v. Hon granville/simpson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
(noting that we will uphold a restitution order “if it bears a reasonable relationship to the victim’s loss”).
State v. Leker Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Leker Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
all criminal proceedings where the defendant has the right to be present.” (quoting Ariz. Const. art. II, § 2.1(A)(3)); see A.R.S.
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 v. Stocks 258 P.3d 208 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
State v. Stocks 258 P.3d 208 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
In Re Brendan G. 212 P.3d 830 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
In Re Brendan G. 212 P.3d 830 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
See, , ("Although we previously said if a loss is a `foreseeable' loss it is not merely a consequential loss ...
State v. ZAPUTIL 207 P.3d 678 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
State v. ZAPUTIL 207 P.3d 678 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
(“The trial court has the affirmative duty to require a defendant convicted of a crime to make full restitution for the economic loss sustained by the victim.”).
State v. Guadagni 178 P.3d 473 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2008
State v. Guadagni 178 P.3d 473 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2008
including] lost earnings.” Wages lost due to voluntary attendance at trial are recoverable, -99 , -52 (App.1997), as are a victim’s travel expenses.
State of Arizona v. Michael Manuel Dixon Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
State of Arizona v. Michael Manuel Dixon Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
In Re William L. 119 P.3d 1039 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2005
In Re William L. 119 P.3d 1039 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2005
State of Arizona v. Clayton M. Guilliams Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2004
State of Arizona v. Clayton M. Guilliams Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2004
195, P.2d 1310 (App. 1992).
State v. Madrid 85 P.3d 1054 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
State v. Madrid 85 P.3d 1054 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
In Re Andrew A. 58 P.3d 527 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2002
In Re Andrew A. 58 P.3d 527 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2002
Action No. JV-132905, , , (“Recoverable economic losses are those that flow directly from or are a direct result of the crime committed.”).
State v. Wilkinson 39 P.3d 1131 Ariz. 2002
State v. Wilkinson 39 P.3d 1131 Ariz. 2002
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
In Re Erika V. 983 P.2d 768 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
In Re Erika V. 983 P.2d 768 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999