Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Minjares v. State, 219 P.3d 264.

30 citing documents.

Muse v. Goodson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
Muse v. Goodson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
¶ 26 (App. 2009) (“[A]fter it lost the appeal, the State asked the superior court to reach a legal conclusion that A.R.S.
Howard v. Howard Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
Howard v. Howard Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
Nguyen v. Nguyen Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Nguyen v. Nguyen Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
¶ 17 (App. 2009); see Fields, 291 Ariz. at 575, ¶ 32 ("Typically, waiver is 'a question of fact.'").
Custom Accounting v. Sal E. Mander Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
Custom Accounting v. Sal E. Mander Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
In Re the Estate of Susan Ruth Chalker Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2023
In Re the Estate of Susan Ruth Chalker Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2023
P. 60(b)(5), even after a trial court has entered final judgment pursuant to an appellate court mandate, ¶¶ 20, 22 (App. 2009).
Hkb, Inc. v. Imperial Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Hkb, Inc. v. Imperial Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Arik v. Rgo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Arik v. Rgo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
North Canyon v. Allen Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
North Canyon v. Allen Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Diana Glazer v. State of Arizona 423 P.3d 993 Ariz. 2018
Diana Glazer v. State of Arizona 423 P.3d 993 Ariz. 2018
–63 ¶¶ 39–41 (App. 2009) (discussing the history of § 41-622(F)).
Glazer v. State 396 P.3d 627 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Glazer v. State 396 P.3d 627 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
62-63 ¶¶ 37-41, -73 (App. 2009) (examining A.R.S.
Viad v. Moneygram Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Viad v. Moneygram Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
“Waiver generally requires a finding of intentional relinquishment of a known right or of conduct that would warrant such an inference.” ¶ 17 (App. 2009).
State v. Turner 372 P.3d 334 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Turner 372 P.3d 334 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
STATE v. TURNER Opinion of the Court 62, ¶ 34 (App. 2009) ("We also may consider a title to aid in interpretation.").
Aa American v. Lewandowski Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Aa American v. Lewandowski Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
“A clear showing of intent to waive is required for waiver of rights.” ¶ 17, ( ).
monroe/pirtle v. Gagan Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
monroe/pirtle v. Gagan Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
¶ 33, (reviewing a previous version of this statute).
Stearns v. Arizona Department of Revenue 291 P.3d 369 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
Stearns v. Arizona Department of Revenue 291 P.3d 369 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
“Whether res judicata applies in particular circumstances is a question of law that we review de novo.” ¶ 12