Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Torrez, 544 P.2d 207.

32 citing documents.

  • State v. MacIas Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
  • State v. MacIas Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
    “Where facts are indicated so that the magistrate may conclude that the activity is of a continuous nature or in a course of conduct, the passage of time becomes less significant.” ().
  • State v. Peterson 830 P.2d 854 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
  • State v. Peterson 830 P.2d 854 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
    Probable cause to arrest exists if the police have “reasonable grounds to believe that an offense is being or has been committed by the person arrested____” , ( , cert.
  • State v. Wiley 698 P.2d 1244 Ariz. 1985
  • State v. Lawson 698 P.2d 1266 Ariz. 1985
  • State v. Lawson 698 P.2d 1266 Ariz. 1985
    We have stated that a police officer has probable cause for an arrest if he has “reasonable grounds to believe that an offense is being or has been committed by the person arrested * * , cert.
  • State v. Wiley 698 P.2d 1244 Ariz. 1985
    We have stated that a police officer has probable cause for an arrest if he has “reasonable grounds to believe that an offense is being or has been committed by the person arrested * * , cert.
  • State v. Martin 679 P.2d 489 Ariz. 1984
  • State v. Martin 679 P.2d 489 Ariz. 1984
  • State v. McCall 677 P.2d 920 Ariz. 1983
  • State v. McCall 677 P.2d 920 Ariz. 1983
    See United States v. Lucarz, 430 F.2d 1051 (9th Cir.1970); , cert.
  • State v. Turney 655 P.2d 358 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
  • State v. Turney 655 P.2d 358 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
  • State v. Hale 641 P.2d 1288 Ariz. 1982
  • State v. Hale 641 P.2d 1288 Ariz. 1982
  • State v. Kelly 636 P.2d 153 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1981
  • State v. Kelly 636 P.2d 153 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1981
  • State v. SUPERIOR CT. OF STATE OF ARIZ., ETC. 629 P.2d 992 Ariz. 1981
  • State v. SUPERIOR CT. OF STATE OF ARIZ., ETC. 629 P.2d 992 Ariz. 1981
  • State v. Hale 641 P.2d 1293 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1981
  • State v. Hale 641 P.2d 1293 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1981
  • State v. Smith 593 P.2d 281 Ariz. 1979
  • State v. Smith 593 P.2d 281 Ariz. 1979
  • State v. Albert 565 P.2d 534 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1977
  • State v. Albert 565 P.2d 534 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1977
  • State v. Moody 560 P.2d 1272 Ariz. 1977
  • State v. Moody 560 P.2d 1272 Ariz. 1977
    our Supreme Court said: “We are aware of the fact that affidavit disclosed that another informant had been ‘advised’ that appellant would not allow anyone to whom he was selling heroin to come to his home because ‘he kept large quantities of narcotics (heroin) *367 in his residence.’ This inform
  • State v. Watson 550 P.2d 89 Ariz. 1976
  • State v. Watson 550 P.2d 89 Ariz. 1976
    United States v. Lucarz, 430 F.2d 1051 (9th Cir. 1970).
  • State v. Payne 544 P.2d 671 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
  • State v. Payne 544 P.2d 671 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976