State of Arizona v. Craig Michael Stefanovich

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding the defendant waived a claim on review when he “cite[d] no relevant authority and [did] not develop the argument in any meaningful way”
• holding appellant waived claim on review for insufficient argument and failure to cite supporting legal authority
• concluding that an insufficient argument waives a claim on review
• concluding the defendant “waived [his] claim on review because he cites no relevant authority and does not develop the argument in any meaningful way”
• waiving claim on review where the petitioner failed to cite supporting authority and provide a meaningfully developed argument
• requiring a petition for review to cite relevant authority and meaningfully develop the supporting argument

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).