Court of Appeals of Arizona· 5/25/2005

State v. Kelly

Citations

112 P.3d 682
210 Ariz. 460
452 Ariz. Adv. Rep. 5
2005 Ariz. App. LEXIS 70

How courts have described this case

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

“Because the . . . provision [at issue] functions as an exception, it is not an element of the offense that the state must prove.”
“Because the restoration provision of § 13-3101(A)(6)(b) functions as an exception, it is not an element of the offense that the state must prove.”
“ ‘Dictum is not binding precedent because, inter alia, it is without the force of adjudication and the court may not have been fully advised on the question.’ ”
prior opinion not binding precedent on issue not squarely presented for decision
“error of law may constitute an abuse of discretion”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Brammer, Howard, Eckerstrom

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

7 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

26 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

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.