Cited by

(“[T]he state’s failure to timely appeal or cross-appeal acts as a jurisdictional bar to 12 STATE v. YOUNG Opinion of the Court its raising the [illegal sentencing] error.)

Thus, “[i]n the absence of a constitutional provision or statute conferring the state’s right to appeal, an appellate court has no subject 8 STATE v. SANTILLANES Opinion of the Court matter jurisdiction to consider that appeal.” (“The right of appeal in criminal cases is not known to the common law and exists, if at all, by virtue of some constitutional or statutory provision.”).

5 STATE v. SANCHEZ Opinion of the Court judgment of conviction,” an appellate court was to “review all rulings affecting the judgment.” (Cameron, J., dissenting) (emphasis added) (quoting former § 13-4035(A)).

¶ 19 (2020) (–84 (1990)).

(1990) (Statutes permitting criminal appeals by the State are in “derogation” of the common law and “should be strictly construed.”).

See Bryant, 219 Ariz. at 516 ¶ 7; –86 (1990).

(“In the absence of a timely appeal or cross-appeal by the state seeking to correct an illegally lenient sentence, an appellate court has no subject matter jurisdiction to consider that issue.”).

See Vargas-Burgos, 162 Ariz. at 326-27 (recognizing the State’s right to appeal a sentencing error despite failing to object below); (noting that a sentencing error “is one of those rare situations” where the State may seek review despite failing to object below).

–83 (1990) (when a miscalculation favors the defendant, it cannot be corrected unless the State timely cross-appeals).

(appellate court lacks jurisdiction to correct illegally lenient sentence absent appeal or cross-appeal by the State).