State v. Jimenez

How courts have described this case

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

• holding the denial of a motion to modify terms of a defendant’s probation is not an order affecting the substantial rights of the defendant
• assuming modification of probation appealable, pursuant to A.R.S. § 13-4033(A)(3), as post-judgment order affecting defendant's substantial rights
• appealable post-judgment orders raise issues different from those arising from the underlying judgment
• denial of motion to modify probation conditions not appealable
• denial of motion to modify probation conditions not appealable

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

14 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Marilyn Gene Summers v. Dora B. Schriro, Director, Warden Terry Goddard, Attorney General of the State of Arizona
  Ninth Circuit· 2007-03-13· cited 60×
• State v. Regenold
  Arizona Supreme Court· 2011-03-01· cited 20×
• Frank Hoffman v. Hon. chandler/state
  Arizona Supreme Court· 2013-03-05· cited 19×
• State v. Rodriguez-Gonzales
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2004-06-16· cited 5×
• Montero v. Foreman
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2003-02-27· cited 5×
• State of Arizona v. Patrick James Soriano
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2008-01-30· cited 5×
• Keenan Reed-Kaliher v. State of Arizona
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2014-07-25· cited 2×
• State of Arizona v. John George Ponsart Jr.
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2010-06-11
• State of Arizona v. Armando D. Rodriguez-Gonzales Hieber
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2004-06-16
• Alex Paul Rasmussen v. State of Arizona
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2011-07-01
• Summers v. Schriro
  Ninth Circuit· 2007-03-12
• State v. Crain
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2022-06-09
• State v. Redzinak
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2018-05-22
• State of Arizona v. Bobby Charles Purcell
  Arizona Supreme Court· 2023-04-03