Cited by
Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Maldonado, 373 P.2d 583.
- State v. Stout 425 P.2d 582 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1967
-
State v. Stout
425 P.2d 582
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1967
states as follows: “ ‘The constitutional right of a defendant charged with crime is to a speedy trial, and this primarily had to do with his personal liberty as being the one and efficient means by which he should not, for an undue time, be left to languish in jail, and thus be robbed of such pa
- State v. Tuggle 418 P.2d 372 Ariz. 1966
- State v. Tuggle 418 P.2d 372 Ariz. 1966
- State v. Pruett 415 P.2d 888 Ariz. 1966
- State v. Pruett 415 P.2d 888 Ariz. 1966
- Rojas v. Superior Court of Maricopa County 414 P.2d 740 Ariz. 1966
- Rojas v. Superior Court of Maricopa County 414 P.2d 740 Ariz. 1966
- Norton v. Superior Court 411 P.2d 170 Ariz. 1966
- Norton v. Superior Court 411 P.2d 170 Ariz. 1966
- Palmer v. State 407 P.2d 64 Ariz. 1965
- Palmer v. State 407 P.2d 64 Ariz. 1965
- State v. Sheffield 396 P.2d 828 Ariz. 1964
- State v. Sheffield 396 P.2d 828 Ariz. 1964
- Ralls v. Justice Court 377 P.2d 194 Ariz. 1962
-
Ralls v. Justice Court
377 P.2d 194
Ariz. 1962
we held that “Rule 236 on its face applies only ‘when a person has been held to answer for an offense’ and/or ‘when a person has been indicted or informed against for an offense.’ ” In the instant case the petitioner had not been “held to answer” nor has he been “indicted or informed agains