Arizona Supreme Court· 5/30/2007

State v. Hansen

Citations

160 P.3d 166
215 Ariz. 287
505 Ariz. Adv. Rep. 44
2007 Ariz. LEXIS 61

How courts have described this case

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

concluding that where a statute and rule provided “patently contradictory instructions,” they could not be harmonized
holding that if the court is unable to harmonize an apparently conflicting statute and rule, it must determine whether the matter regulated is procedural or substantive, and if substantive, then the statute prevails
stating that, whenever possible, we harmonize rules and statutes and read them in conjunction with each other
stating that, whenever possible, we harmonize rules and statutes and read them in conjunction with each other
holding whenever possible, rules and statutes’ should be harmonized and read in conjunction with each other
stating that, whenever possible, we harmonize rules and statutes and read them in conjunction with each other

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: McGregor, Berch, Ryan, Hurwttz, Bales

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

100 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

15 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.