State v. Martin

How courts have described this case

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

• determining mere presence with minors in conventional places impermissibly penalizes “innocent physical presence with other human beings”
• reversing after determining evidence “insufficient to support a violation of [probation condition] as phrased in the probation document”
• finding insufficient evidence to support a probation violation occurred and was therefore reversible error
• stating “the trial court appears to have relied upon the term 20 violation as a major but not exclusive factor in sentencing,” and remanding for a new disposition because “[f]rom the record we cannot determine what the disposition would be without the term 20 violation”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

1 case in this archive cites this case.

• State v. Maggio
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2000-02-17· cited 1×

Cites

3 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• State v. Ojeda
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1989-01-10· cited 47×
• State v. Jones
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1990-01-04· cited 14×
• State v. Baylis
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1976-08-03· cited 5×