Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Superior Court in and for County of Maricopa, 390 P.2d 109.

50 citing documents.

Incito Schools v. State Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
Incito Schools v. State Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
332 (1964) (quoting Pittsburgh Plate Glass Co. v. United States, 260 U.S. 395, 399 (1959)).
State of Arizona v. Hon. Jeffrey T. Bergin, Hon. Danielle Liwski Remington 541 P.3d 587 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2023
State of Arizona v. Hon. Jeffrey T. Bergin, Hon. Danielle Liwski Remington 541 P.3d 587 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2023
the state maintains that Remington was required to “show a ‘particularized need’ that the transcript must be disclosed ‘in the furtherance of justice.’” For his part, Remington did not challenge this standard in his response to the petition for special action.
Aranzi Rae Jon Willis v. Hon. bernini/state 515 P.3d 142 Ariz. 2022
Aranzi Rae Jon Willis v. Hon. bernini/state 515 P.3d 142 Ariz. 2022
(concluding that “a fundamental change in the grand jury system .
In re the Appeal in Maricopa County Juvenile Action No. JV131701 904 P.2d 1305 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
In re the Appeal in Maricopa County Juvenile Action No. JV131701 904 P.2d 1305 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
Book Cellar, Inc. v. City of Phoenix 678 P.2d 517 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
Book Cellar, Inc. v. City of Phoenix 678 P.2d 517 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
our Supreme Court frankly adopted the California view that an "abuse of discretion" may be reviewed by certiorari.
State Ex Rel. Hyder v. SUPERIOR COURT, ETC. 624 P.2d 1264 Ariz. 1981
State Ex Rel. Hyder v. SUPERIOR COURT, ETC. 624 P.2d 1264 Ariz. 1981
Jones v. Lopez Plascencia 458 P.2d 120 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1969
Jones v. Lopez Plascencia 458 P.2d 120 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1969
Ronan v. Superior Court, In and For Maricopa County
Martin v. Superior Court in and for Co. of Maricopa 451 P.2d 597 Ariz. 1969
Martin v. Superior Court in and for Co. of Maricopa 451 P.2d 597 Ariz. 1969
Ronan v. Superior Court, etc., , ; , .
Application of Hathcock 450 P.2d 419 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
Application of Hathcock 450 P.2d 419 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
*180 and Application of Buccheri, 6 Ariz.App.
Pazos v. Superior Court 448 P.2d 130 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1968
Pazos v. Superior Court 448 P.2d 130 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1968
Garcia v. Frey 442 P.2d 159 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1968
Garcia v. Frey 442 P.2d 159 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1968
Ronan v. Superior Court in and for County ‘of Maricopa, , it is considered not inappropriate to consider evidence dehors the record below offered “ * * * not to impeach the record made in the court below but to supplement and explain it and to develop the true facts upon which must rest the question of the jurisdiction of the superior court * * Wi
Genda v. Superior Court, County of Pima 439 P.2d 811 Ariz. 1968
Genda v. Superior Court, County of Pima 439 P.2d 811 Ariz. 1968
Foster v. Brooks 438 P.2d 952 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1968
Foster v. Brooks 438 P.2d 952 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1968
Agraan v. Superior Court in and for Pima County, 4 Ariz.App.
Phelps Dodge Corp. v. Superior Court in and for County of Cochise 438 P.2d 424 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1968
Phelps Dodge Corp. v. Superior Court in and for County of Cochise 438 P.2d 424 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1968
our Supreme Court frankly adopted the California view that an “ * * * abuse of discretion” may be reviewed by special writ.
Application of Buccheri 431 P.2d 91 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1967
Application of Buccheri 431 P.2d 91 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1967
Rivera v. Superior Court 430 P.2d 696 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1967
Rivera v. Superior Court 430 P.2d 696 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1967
Williams v. Garrett 417 P.2d 378 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1966
Williams v. Garrett 417 P.2d 378 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1966
Burke v. SUPERIOR COURT, IN AND FOR COUNTY OF PIMA 416 P.2d 997 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1966
Burke v. SUPERIOR COURT, IN AND FOR COUNTY OF PIMA 416 P.2d 997 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1966
Caruso v. Superior Court in and for County of Pima 412 P.2d 463 Ariz. 1966
Wales v. Tax Commission 412 P.2d 472 Ariz. 1966
Wales v. Tax Commission 412 P.2d 472 Ariz. 1966
we detailed the circumstances which justify a disclosure of the testimony given before a grand jury.
Caruso v. Superior Court in and for County of Pima 412 P.2d 463 Ariz. 1966
Goff v. Superior Courts in and for Counties of Pima and Maricopa 409 P.2d 60 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1965
Goff v. Superior Courts in and for Counties of Pima and Maricopa 409 P.2d 60 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1965
Lesher, Extraordinary Writs in the Appellate Courts of Arizona, 7 Ariz. L.Rev., pp. 34 et seq.
State v. Wallace 399 P.2d 909 Ariz. 1965
State v. Wallace 399 P.2d 909 Ariz. 1965
State v. Superior Court in & for County of Maricopa 393 P.2d 919 Ariz. 1964
State v. Superior Court in & for County of Maricopa 393 P.2d 919 Ariz. 1964
Goodman v. State 393 P.2d 148 Ariz. 1964
Goodman v. State 393 P.2d 148 Ariz. 1964
Buell v. Superior Court of Maricopa County 391 P.2d 919 Ariz. 1964
Buell v. Superior Court of Maricopa County 391 P.2d 919 Ariz. 1964