Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Maberry, 380 P.2d 604.

57 citing documents.

State v. King 391 P.2d 598 Ariz. 1964
State v. Salinas 386 P.2d 790 Ariz. 1963
State v. Salinas 386 P.2d 790 Ariz. 1963
: “We have traditionally been prone to uphold a sentence declared by a trial judge when it is in conformity with the statute and there is no clear evidence that he has abused his power in the particular case.” 93 Ariz. at 309 , 380 P.2d at 606 .
State v. Caldera 385 P.2d 207 Ariz. 1963
State v. Caldera 385 P.2d 207 Ariz. 1963
Appellant’s arguments as to the sentence imposed on Count II are that it was so excessive as to “shock the moral sense of the community” and that the information before the sentencing judge was “unreliable, misleading, and inflammatory.” , , 606: “Because a defendant appears in person before the trial judge, the trial judge is, in most instances, better able than we to evaluate him and to determine what is necessary to rehabilitate him to constructive activity.
State Ex Rel. Ronan v. Stevens 381 P.2d 100 Ariz. 1963
State Ex Rel. Ronan v. Stevens 381 P.2d 100 Ariz. 1963
We feel that the intentions of the trial court were commendable as being in the interests of justice and consonant with the principle recently enunciated that “reformation and rehabilitation of offenders rather than retribution are the important goals of criminal jurisprudence.” , .