Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Knapp v. Martone, 823 P.2d 685.

37 citing documents.

State of Arizona v. Vivek a Patel 486 P.3d 188 Ariz. 2021
State of Arizona v. Vivek a Patel 486 P.3d 188 Ariz. 2021
amendment to our constitution.”
Z.W. v. Foster 422 P.3d 582 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Lindsay R. v. Cohen 343 P.3d 435 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Lindsay R. v. Cohen 343 P.3d 435 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
J.D. M.M. v. Hon. hegyi/t.D./state of Arizona 335 P.3d 1118 Ariz. 2014
J.D. M.M. v. Hon. hegyi/t.D./state of Arizona 335 P.3d 1118 Ariz. 2014
State v. Lucas 321 P.3d 428 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Lucas 321 P.3d 428 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Such proceedings can only increase the harassment of victims that the Victims’ Bill of Rights was designed to decrease.”
State of Arizona v. John David Franklin, Sr. & John David Franklin, Jr. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2011
State of Arizona v. John David Franklin, Sr. & John David Franklin, Jr. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2011
State of Arizona v. Robert Arthur Ergonis Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2010
State of Arizona v. Robert Arthur Ergonis Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2010
6 guaranteed by the state constitution‟”), n.5, n.5 (1992) (legislature has power to “„define, implement, preserve and protect‟” victims‟ rights but not “to redefine the scope of those rights”), quoting Ariz. Const., art. II, § 2.1(D); (rights created by initiative o
State v. Guadagni 178 P.3d 473 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2008
State v. Guadagni 178 P.3d 473 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2008
See, , (mother’s potential criminal liability for children’s murder); -300 , -75 (App.1995) (comparative fault for drinking with driver).
Lincoln v. Holt 156 P.3d 438 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
Lincoln v. Holt 156 P.3d 438 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
Ct. In and For County of Maricopa, -10 , -77 (App.1995); -39 , -87 (1992).
State v. Roscoe 912 P.2d 1297 Ariz. 1996
State v. Roscoe 912 P.2d 1297 Ariz. 1996
In holding that the police officer victims, like other victims, had a right to decline interviews, the court of appeals relied, in part, on this court’s decision in Knapp v. *71 Martone
Ah v. Super. Ct. in and for Mohave Cty. 911 P.2d 633 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
A.H. v. Superior Court 911 P.2d 633 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
A.H. v. Superior Court 911 P.2d 633 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
Ah v. Super. Ct. in and for Mohave Cty. 911 P.2d 633 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
State Ex Rel. Romley v. Superior Court 909 P.2d 476 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
State Ex Rel. Romley v. Superior Court 909 P.2d 476 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
State v. Lamberton 899 P.2d 939 Ariz. 1995
State v. Lamberton 899 P.2d 939 Ariz. 1995
(emphasizing “that Arizona courts must follow and apply the plain language of this new amendment to our constitution”).
State v. Roscoe 897 P.2d 634 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1995
State v. Roscoe 897 P.2d 634 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1995
State v. Clinton 890 P.2d 74 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
State v. Clinton 890 P.2d 74 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
(affording Victims’ Bill of Rights protection to unindict-ed suspect in case involving murder of her two children).
State Ex Rel. Hance v. Arizona Board of Pardons & Paroles 875 P.2d 824 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
State Ex Rel. Hance v. Arizona Board of Pardons & Paroles 875 P.2d 824 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
Sa v. Superior Ct. in and for Cty. of Maricopa 831 P.2d 1297 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
Sa v. Superior Ct. in and for Cty. of Maricopa 831 P.2d 1297 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
State Ex Rel. Dean v. City Court of City of Tucson 844 P.2d 1165 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1992
State Ex Rel. Dean v. City Court of City of Tucson 844 P.2d 1165 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1992