Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Rothweiler v. Superior Court of Pima County, 410 P.2d 479.

130 citing documents.

Bazzanella v. Tucson City Court 988 P.2d 157 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1999
Bazzanella v. Tucson City Court 988 P.2d 157 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1999
The superior court accepted jurisdiction, but denied relief, concluding that, , Bazzanella was not entitled to a jury trial because she was not exposed to a severe *374 penalty, the charge did not involve moral turpitude, and she would not have been entitled to a jury trial at common law.
Benitez v. Dunevant 979 P.2d 1017 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
Benitez v. Dunevant 979 P.2d 1017 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
McDougall v. Strohson (Cantrell), , -40
Amancio v. Forster 993 P.2d 1059 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
Amancio v. Forster 993 P.2d 1059 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
¶ 8 , a defendant charged with driving under the influence of intoxicating liquor sought a jury trial in superior court.
State v. Flournoy 971 P.2d 197 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
State v. Flournoy 971 P.2d 197 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
Myers v. Reeb 947 P.2d 915 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
Myers v. Reeb 947 P.2d 915 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
State Ex Rel. McDougall v. Strohson 945 P.2d 1251 Ariz. 1997
State Ex Rel. McDougall v. Strohson 945 P.2d 1251 Ariz. 1997
this court concluded that Arizona courts also would examine the moral quality of the act charged, and its relationship to common law crimes.
State v. Superior Court 944 P.2d 515 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
State v. Superior Court 944 P.2d 515 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
*574 In order to determine whether a defendant has a right to a jury trial
Campbell v. Superior Court 924 P.2d 1045 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
Campbell v. Superior Court 924 P.2d 1045 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
Business Realty of Arizona, Inc. v. Maricopa County 870 P.2d 1125 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
Business Realty of Arizona, Inc. v. Maricopa County 870 P.2d 1125 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
334, 336 , (proper to look at history of ambiguous statute), aff'd
Hays v. Continental Insurance 838 P.2d 1334 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
Hays v. Continental Insurance 838 P.2d 1334 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
State v. Miller 836 P.2d 1004 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1992
State v. Miller 836 P.2d 1004 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1992
Because the state is without an adequate remedy by appeal, and a special action is the proper method to question the right to a jury trial, , we assume jurisdiction and grant relief.
Mungarro v. Riley 826 P.2d 1215 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1991
Mungarro v. Riley 826 P.2d 1215 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1991
Because Mungarro is without an adequate remedy by appeal, and a special action is the proper means for questioning the right to a jury trial, , we assume jurisdiction and grant relief.
State v. Harrison 792 P.2d 779 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
State v. Harrison 792 P.2d 779 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
Hoyle v. Superior Court 778 P.2d 259 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
Hoyle v. Superior Court 778 P.2d 259 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
Matter of Marquardt 778 P.2d 241 Ariz. 1989
State Ex Rel. Dean v. Dolny 778 P.2d 1193 Ariz. 1989
State Ex Rel. Dean v. Dolny 778 P.2d 1193 Ariz. 1989
State v. Richey 762 P.2d 585 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
State v. Richey 762 P.2d 585 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
established guidelines to analyze whether an offense is petty or serious.
State v. City Court of Tucson 760 P.2d 599 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1988
State v. City Court of Tucson 760 P.2d 599 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1988
Geer v. Ordway 754 P.2d 315 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1987
Geer v. Ordway 754 P.2d 315 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1987
supports his claim of right to a jury trial.
State v. Roscoe 700 P.2d 1312 Ariz. 1984
State v. Roscoe 700 P.2d 1312 Ariz. 1984
State v. Frey 686 P.2d 1291 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
State v. Frey 686 P.2d 1291 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
Article II, § 23, Arizona Constitution
State Ex Rel. Dean v. City Court of Tucson 687 P.2d 369 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1984
State Ex Rel. Dean v. City Court of Tucson 687 P.2d 369 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1984
Spitz v. Municipal Court of City of Phoenix 621 P.2d 911 Ariz. 1980
Spitz v. Municipal Court of City of Phoenix 621 P.2d 911 Ariz. 1980
City Court of City of Tucson v. Lee, 16 Ariz.App.
State Ex Rel. Baumert v. SUPERIOR COURT, ETC. 618 P.2d 1078 Ariz. 1980
State Ex Rel. Baumert v. SUPERIOR COURT, ETC. 618 P.2d 1078 Ariz. 1980
St. Johns Irrigation & Ditch Co. v. Arizona Water Commission 621 P.2d 37 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980
St. Johns Irrigation & Ditch Co. v. Arizona Water Commission 621 P.2d 37 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980
Jacobson v. Superior Court, 1 Ariz.App.
Bruce v. State 614 P.2d 813 Ariz. 1980