Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Patton, 586 P.2d 635.

94 citing documents.

State of Arizona v. Kalill Stubblefield Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2025
State of Arizona v. Kalill Stubblefield Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2025
(trial court, in most instances, more able than appellate courts to evaluate defendant and his circumstances).
State v. Schaeffer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
State v. Schaeffer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
ourt to modify sentences should [] be tempered by the realization that a defendant appears in person before the trial judge, 10 STATE v. SCHAEFFER Decision of the Court rendering that judge, in most instances, more able than ourselves to evaluate the defendant and h[er] circumstances.”
Spence v. Bacal 413 P.3d 1254 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2018
Spence v. Bacal 413 P.3d 1254 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2018
State v. Patton , , 389-90, , 638-39 (1978).
State v. Alvarado Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Alvarado Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Kummer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Kummer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
unless it clearly appears that the court abused its discretion.” ¶ 6, ( ).
State v. Bowsher 221 P.3d 368 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2009
State v. Bowsher 221 P.3d 368 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2009
Hence, our supreme court stated in Jones : We agree with the Court of Appeals [in Catalan] and their reading of [State v.] Patton, [ , ] ..., that if the rationale[s] in Pakula, Carter, and Jordan ...
State v. Davolt 84 P.3d 456 Ariz. 2004
State v. Davolt 84 P.3d 456 Ariz. 2004
State v. Long 83 P.3d 618 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
State v. Long 83 P.3d 618 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
State v. Cazares 72 P.3d 355 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2003
State of Arizona v. Ernesto Luis Cazares Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2003
State of Arizona v. Ernesto Luis Cazares Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2003
P.2d 635 (1978); P.2d 1355 (App. 1985).
State v. Cazares 72 P.3d 355 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2003
State v. DePiano 926 P.2d 494 Ariz. 1996
State v. DePiano 926 P.2d 494 Ariz. 1996
State v. SUPERIOR COURT FOR NAVAJO CO. 903 P.2d 635 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
State v. SUPERIOR COURT FOR NAVAJO CO. 903 P.2d 635 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
State v. Atwood 832 P.2d 593 Ariz. 1992
State v. Atwood 832 P.2d 593 Ariz. 1992
("An abuse of discretion is that which shocks the conscience of the court and appears so unfair and inequitable that a reasonable person could not abide it.”).
State v. Calderon 827 P.2d 473 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1991
State v. Calderon 827 P.2d 473 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1991
State v. House 821 P.2d 233 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1991
Distinguished State v. House 821 P.2d 233 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1991
While the fact that the trial court imposed sentence after it realized, at least to some extent, that it did not have before it all factors relevant to sentencing may amount to an abuse of the court’s sentencing discretion, , , this does not mean the sentence was imposed in an unlawful manner.
In Re the Appeal in Pima County Juvenile Action No. 45363-3 729 P.2d 345 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
In Re the Appeal in Pima County Juvenile Action No. 45363-3 729 P.2d 345 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
While we agree that restraint, deterrence and rehabilitation are valid purposes for ordering restitution, , the court also must consider the victim’s loss in fashioning an order appropriate to a particular case.
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
State v. Thurlow 712 P.2d 929 Ariz. 1986
State v. Thurlow 712 P.2d 929 Ariz. 1986
this court reviewed some of the specific circumstances to be considered by a trial court in the exercise of its sentencing discretion.
State v. Jones 710 P.2d 463 Ariz. 1985
State v. Jones 710 P.2d 463 Ariz. 1985
State v. Stotts 695 P.2d 1110 Ariz. 1985
State v. Stotts 695 P.2d 1110 Ariz. 1985
State v. Ross 696 P.2d 706 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1984
State v. Ross 696 P.2d 706 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1984
State v. Miller, supra; , , , cert.
State v. Thomas 688 P.2d 1093 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
State v. Thomas 688 P.2d 1093 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
State v. Mincey 687 P.2d 1180 Ariz. 1984
State v. Mincey 687 P.2d 1180 Ariz. 1984
State v. Flores 682 P.2d 1136 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1984
State v. Flores 682 P.2d 1136 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1984
State v. Chavez 693 P.2d 936 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
State v. Chavez 693 P.2d 936 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
State v. Gordon; , State v. Limpus.