Arizona Supreme Court· 1/7/2010
State v. Maldonado
Citations
- 223 P.3d 653
- 223 Ariz. 309
- 573 Ariz. Adv. Rep. 8
- 2010 Ariz. LEXIS 1
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- concluding reasoning of two prior supreme court eases, which found jurisdictional error arising from mere procedural defects in charging process, “no longer tenable”
- providing that a court that lacks subject matter jurisdiction cannot adjudicate the action
- rejecting the suggestion that a defective information in itself deprives a court of subject matter jurisdiction
- discussing the difference between subject-matter jurisdiction and the court acting beyond constitutional or statutory authority
- \Jurisdiction in this sense cannot be conferred by the consent of the parties and a court that lacks subject matter jurisdiction cannot adjudicate the action.\
- “ ‘[Sjubject matter jurisdiction’ refers to a court’s statutory or constitutional power to hear and determine a particular type of case.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Bales, Berch, Hurwitz, Ryan, Pelander
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
27 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- State v. RankinSupreme Court of North Carolina· 2018-12-21· cited 74×
- In Re the Marriage of ThornCourt of Appeals of Arizona· 2014-07-17· cited 48×
- Ader v. Estate of FelgerCourt of Appeals of Arizona· 2016-05-27· cited 44×
- State v. Apollonio.Hawaii Supreme Court· 2013-10-10· cited 41×
- A.S. v. R.S.Utah Supreme Court· 2017-11-14· cited 32×
- Smith v. SmithUtah Supreme Court· 2017-11-14· cited 27×
- Olesen v. daniel/burgeCourt of Appeals of Arizona· 2021-03-11· cited 21×
- State of Arizona v. Pierre BandaCourt of Appeals of Arizona· 2013-08-19· cited 19×
- Glover v. GloverCourt of Appeals of Arizona· 2012-11-13· cited 16×
- State v. EspinozaCourt of Appeals of Arizona· 2012-04-30· cited 15×
- State v. SpreadburyMontana Supreme Court· 2011-07-26· cited 13×
- Ad Hoc Committee of Parishioners of Our Lady of Sun Catholic Church, Inc. v. ReissCourt of Appeals of Arizona· 2010-02-23· cited 13×
- Sierra Tucson Crc Health Group v. Louise LitwackCourt of Appeals of Arizona· 2012-06-28· cited 12×
- Sheets v. Hon. mead/reynoldsCourt of Appeals of Arizona· 2015-08-25· cited 12×
- Church of the Isaiah 58 Project of Arizona, Inc. v. La Paz CountyCourt of Appeals of Arizona· 2013-09-12· cited 12×
- State of Arizona v. Reuben Renee CotaCourt of Appeals of Arizona· 2014-02-25· cited 11×
- Lay v. Nelson In And For County Of YumaCourt of Appeals of Arizona· 2019-01-24· cited 4×
- Boruch v. State ex rel. HalikowskiCourt of Appeals of Arizona· 2017-06-20· cited 3×
- BNSF Railway Co. v. ButtrickCourt of Appeals of Arizona· 2011-12-29
- AD HOC COMMITTEE OF PARISHIONERS v. ReissCourt of Appeals of Arizona· 2010-02-23
Cites
13 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- United States v. CottonSupreme Court· 2002-05-20· cited 3,303×
- State v. HendersonArizona Supreme Court· 2005-07-08· cited 1,009×
- Taliaferro v. TaliaferroArizona Supreme Court· 1996-06-20· cited 61×
- Marvin Johnson, PC v. MyersArizona Supreme Court· 1995-12-14· cited 54×
- State v. FimbresCourt of Appeals of Arizona· 2009-08-07· cited 33×
- First National Bank & Trust Co. v. Pomona MacHinery Co.Arizona Supreme Court· 1971-06-25· cited 28×
- Burris v. DavisArizona Supreme Court· 1935-07-08· cited 27×
- Oswald v. MartinArizona Supreme Court· 1950-10-02· cited 24×
- State v. BuckleyCourt of Appeals of Arizona· 1987-02-05· cited 13×
- State v. SheppardCourt of Appeals of Arizona· 1965-11-19· cited 12×
- Sheridan v. Superior CourtArizona Supreme Court· 1962-04-25· cited 10×
- Paxton v. WaltersArizona Supreme Court· 1951-05-21· cited 8×
- State v. MaldonadoCourt of Appeals of Arizona· 2009-05-12· cited 2×
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.