Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Herrera, 588 P.2d 305.

64 citing documents.

State v. Borota Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Borota Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Ernest v. Carylee W. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Ernest v. Carylee W. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
To assert a constitutional challenge, an individual must have suffered “some threatened or actual injury resulting from the putatively illegal action.” State v. B Bar Enterprises, Inc., n.2 (1982) ().
Sarah P., Michael M. v. Dcs, V.B. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Sarah P., Michael M. v. Dcs, V.B. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Carver Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Carver Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Nash Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Nash Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
See, (“After the revocation of probation the defendant could have appealed from the sentence imposed or any issues raised by the revocation of his probation.” (citation omitted)).
State v. Castillo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Castillo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
-15, -08 (1978) (appellant procedurally barred from attacking constitutional merits of original judgment of conviction in probation revocation matter).
Lisa K. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 281 P.3d 1041 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
Lisa K. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 281 P.3d 1041 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
See Church v. Rawson Drug & Sundry Co., (initial question in constitutional challenge to statute whether party has standing to assert claim); (“In order to possess standing to assert a constitutional challenge, an individual must himself have suffered some threatened or actual injury .
O'BRIEN v. Escher 65 P.3d 107 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2003
O'BRIEN v. Escher 65 P.3d 107 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2003
(punishment imposed after revocation of probation is not for violating probation conditions but for original charge); , (trial court erroneously punished defendant for violating probation conditions rather than for offense
Jeremy Sean O'Brien v. State Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2003
Jeremy Sean O'Brien v. State Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2003
(punishment imposed after revocation of probation is not for violating probation conditions but for original charge); (trial court erroneously punished defendant for violating probation conditions rather than for offens
Mejia v. Industrial Commission 39 P.3d 1135 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2002
Mejia v. Industrial Commission 39 P.3d 1135 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2002
(punishment for revocation of probation is not for probationary breach but for original charge); , (trial court erroneously punished defendant for probation violation, not crime).
State v. Hoggatt 18 P.3d 1239 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2001
State v. Hoggatt 18 P.3d 1239 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2001
(for standing to assert a constitutional challenge, individual must have suffered a threatened or actual injury).
State v. Lefevre 972 P.2d 1021 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
State v. Lefevre 972 P.2d 1021 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
Sears v. Hull 961 P.2d 1013 Ariz. 1998
Sears v. Hull 961 P.2d 1013 Ariz. 1998
Matter of Estate of Dobert 963 P.2d 327 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
Matter of Estate of Dobert 963 P.2d 327 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
To have standing to raise the question, all that is necessary is that the party making the assertion “be confronted with some ‘threatened or actual injury’ from the operation of the statute.” Church v. Rawson Drug & Sundry Co., , ( , cert.
State v. Trachtman 947 P.2d 905 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
State v. Trachtman 947 P.2d 905 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
“In order to possess standing to assert a constitutional challenge, an individual must himself have suffered ‘some threatened or actual injury resulting from the putatively illegal action.’ ” -16 , -09 (1978) (quoting Warth v. Seldin, 422 U.S. 490, 499 , 95 S.Ct.
State v. DePiano 926 P.2d 494 Ariz. 1996
State v. DePiano 926 P.2d 494 Ariz. 1996
State v. Baum 893 P.2d 1301 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
Salas v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 893 P.2d 1304 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
State v. Baum 893 P.2d 1301 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
Salas v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 893 P.2d 1304 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
“In order to possess standing to assert a constitutional challenge, an individual must himself have suffered ‘some threatened or actual injury resulting from the putatively illegal action.’ ” , (quoting Warth v. Seldin, 422 U.S. 490, 499 , 95 S.Ct.
Patterson v. Maricopa County Sheriff's Office 865 P.2d 814 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
Patterson v. Maricopa County Sheriff's Office 865 P.2d 814 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
Church v. Rawson Drug & Sundry Co. 842 P.2d 1355 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
Church v. Rawson Drug & Sundry Co. 842 P.2d 1355 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
State v. Buckley 734 P.2d 1047 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
State v. Buckley 734 P.2d 1047 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
State v. Germain 723 P.2d 105 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
State v. Germain 723 P.2d 105 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
Acolla v. Peralta 721 P.2d 1162 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
Acolla v. Peralta 721 P.2d 1162 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
State v. Schneider 715 P.2d 297 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
State v. Schneider 715 P.2d 297 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
State v. Carriger 692 P.2d 991 Ariz. 1984
State v. Carriger 692 P.2d 991 Ariz. 1984