Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite In Re Twenty-Four ThouSand Dollars ($24,000) in United States Currency, 171 P.3d 1240.

25 citing documents.

In Re $200.00 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
In Re $200.00 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
In re Twenty-Four Thousand Dollars ($24,000) in U.S. Currency, ¶ 12 (App. 2007).
State v. Groh Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Groh Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
did not commit the criminal conduct, but the State cites no authority demonstrating § 13-2314(H) would bar him from arguing certain property was not subject to forfeiture because, for example, the State had failed to meet its burden of establishing a “link between the property to be forfeited and the alleged racketeering conduct.” See In re Twenty-Four Thousand Dollars ($24,000) in U.S. Currency, ¶ 7 (App. 2007).
State v. Yon Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Yon Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Anthony, ¶ 27, citing In re $24,000 in U.S. Currency, ¶¶ 9-10 (App. 2007).
State v. Rivera Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Rivera Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
See In re $24,000.00 in U.S. Currency, ¶ 8 (App. 2007).
State v. Saleem Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Saleem Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
See In re Twenty-Four Thousand Dollars ($24,000) in U.S. Currency, ¶ 7 (App. 2007).
State v. Parsons Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Parsons Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
In re Twenty-Four Thousand Dollars ($24,000) in U.S. Currency, ¶ 12
In Re $70,070 in U.S. Currency 335 P.3d 545 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
In Re $70,070 in U.S. Currency 335 P.3d 545 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
While a probable cause inquiry focuses on the reasonableness of the seizing officers’ belief that the property is subject to forfeiture, e.g., In re Twenty-Four Thousand Dollars ($24,000) in U.S. Currency, Rule 12(b)(6) requires that the complaint’s allegations be tested against the elements of the cause of action pleaded, see Cullen v. Auto-Owners Ins.
State ex rel. Horne v. Anthony 303 P.3d 59 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
State ex rel. Horne v. Anthony 303 P.3d 59 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
In re $24,000 in U.S. Currency, ¶¶ 9-10
In Re U.S. CURRENCY IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,390 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
In Re U.S. CURRENCY IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,390 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
See In re $24,000 U.S. Currency, n.1, n.1 (App. 2007).
STATE, EX REL. HORNE v. Campos 250 P.3d 201 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
STATE, EX REL. HORNE v. Campos 250 P.3d 201 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
As we have recognized, there must be “a link between the property to be forfeited and the alleged racketeering conduct.” In re $24,000 in U.S. Currency, ¶ 7
State of Arizona v. Daniel Diaz Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2009
State of Arizona v. Daniel Diaz Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2009
See In re Twenty-Four Thousand Dollars ($24,000) in U.S. Currency, (noting probative value of alert by narcotics-detection dog).
State v. Guillen 213 P.3d 230 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2009
State v. Western Union Financial Services, Inc. 199 P.3d 592 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
State v. Western Union Financial Services, Inc. 199 P.3d 592 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
In re Twenty-Four Thousand Dollars ($24,000) in United States Currency (“$24,000”), ¶ 12