Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Newton, 21 P.3d 387.

38 citing documents.

State of Arizona v. Jose Soto Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2026
State of Arizona v. Jose Soto Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2026
Because the version in effect at the time of the offenses applies, all references to § 13-705(M) are to the applicable earlier version.
State v. Hons. brearcliffe/vasquez 525 P.3d 1085 Ariz. 2023
State v. Hons. brearcliffe/vasquez 525 P.3d 1085 Ariz. 2023
State v. Wagner 510 P.3d 1083 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Wagner 510 P.3d 1083 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Jorge Romero-Millan v. William Barr 507 P.3d 999 Ariz. 2022
Jorge Romero-Millan v. William Barr 507 P.3d 999 Ariz. 2022
State v. Evans 506 P.3d 819 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Evans 506 P.3d 819 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
“A basic principle of criminal law requires that an offender be sentenced under the laws in effect at the time he committed the offense for which he is being sentenced.” ¶ 3 (2001); see also A.R.S.
State v. Jackson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Jackson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
¶ 3 (2001) (“A basic principle of criminal law requires that an offender be sentenced under the laws in effect at the time he committed the offense for which he is being sentenced.”); ¶ 18 (App. 2016) (noting the legislature’s rejection of a comparative analysis for out-of-sta
State v. Harwood Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Harwood Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
¶ 3 (2001) (“A basic principle of criminal law requires that an offender be sentenced under the laws in effect at the time he committed the offense for which he is being sentenced.”) (citing A.R.S.
State v. Wright Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Wright Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
¶5 “A basic principle of criminal law requires that an offender be sentenced under the laws in effect at the time he committed the offense for which he is being sentenced.” ¶ 3 (2001).
State v. Myers Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Myers Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
¶ 3, (“A basic principle of criminal law requires that an offender be sentenced under the laws in effect at the time he committed the offense for which he is being sentenced.”).
State v. McDaniel Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. McDaniel Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
“A basic principle of criminal law requires that an offender be sentenced under the laws in effect at the time he committed the offense for which he is being sentenced.” ¶ 3, (citation omitted).
State v. Marshall Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Marshall Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
he ex post facto doctrine because the statute “takes away the vested right to a hearing to be absolutely discharged from parole, instead requiring defendants to remain on parole for the remainder of their lives.” “A basic principle of criminal law requires that an offender be sentenced under the laws in effect at the time he committed the offense for which he is being sentenced.” ¶ 3 (2001).
State v. Stewart Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Stewart Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Fuentez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Fuentez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
“A basic principle of criminal law requires that an offender be sentenced under the laws in effect at the time he committed the offense for which he is being sentenced.” ¶ 3
State ex rel. Montgomery v. Harris 301 P.3d 200 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
State ex rel. Montgomery v. Harris 301 P.3d 200 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
(explaining that a person convicted of a crime in Arizona “must be punished under the law in force when the offense was committed and is not exempted from punishment by a subsequent amendment to the applicable statutory provision.” (internal citation and quotation omitted)); ¶ 3 , (“A basic principle of criminal law requires that an offender be sentenced under the laws in effect at the time he committed the offense for which he is being sentenced.”).
State v. Regenold 255 P.3d 1028 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
State v. Regenold 255 P.3d 1028 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
State v. Diaz 230 P.3d 705 Ariz. 2010
State v. Diaz 230 P.3d 705 Ariz. 2010
State v. Karr 212 P.3d 11 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
State v. Karr 212 P.3d 11 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
State v. Stummer 194 P.3d 1043 Ariz. 2008
State v. Stummer 194 P.3d 1043 Ariz. 2008
State v. Griffin 58 P.3d 516 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2002
State v. Griffin 58 P.3d 516 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2002
(upholding mandatory life sentence for defendant convicted of felony involving use of deadly weapon or dangerous instrument while on probation for prior felony conviction); , (same); , (legislature may alter penalty for future crimes).