DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Montgomery, 566 P.2d 1329.

64 citing documents.

  • State v. Rupp 586 P.2d 1302 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1978
  • State v. Rupp 586 P.2d 1302 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1978
  • State v. Cummings 583 P.2d 1389 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1978
  • State v. Cummings 583 P.2d 1389 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1978
  • State v. Davis 579 P.2d 1110 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1978
  • State v. Davis 579 P.2d 1110 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1978
  • State v. Smith 576 P.2d 533 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1978
  • State v. Smith 576 P.2d 533 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1978
    Unless the terms of probation are such as to violate basic fundamental rights or bear no relationship whatever to the purpose of probation over incarceration, we will not disturb the trial court in the exercise of its discretion in imposing conditions of probation.”
  • State v. Goettel 572 P.2d 115 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1977
  • State v. Goettel 572 P.2d 115 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1977
    The final issue concerns a condition of probation requiring appellant to “submit to search and seizure of person or property at any time by any police officer or probation officer without the benefit of a search *290 warrant.” , we reject appellant’s contention that the condition is unlawful.
  • State v. Shirley 570 P.2d 1278 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1977
  • State v. Shirley 570 P.2d 1278 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1977
  • State v. Robledo 569 P.2d 288 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1977
  • State v. Robledo 569 P.2d 288 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1977
    y provided that appellant “shall submit to search and seizure of person or property at any time by any police officer or probation officer without the benefit of a search warrant.” While this court ( , ) has previously wrestled with this provision, the Arizona Supreme Court recently approved it as a , filed after the briefs in this case were prepared.