Court of Appeals of Arizona· 11/30/2005

State v. Ramsey

Citations

124 P.3d 756
211 Ariz. 529
466 Ariz. Adv. Rep. 3
2005 Ariz. App. LEXIS 159

How courts have described this case

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

stating that the defendant had not specifically articulated how his defense was impaired or prejudiced by the amended indictment when his defense was that he did not commit the alleged acts
affirming conviction because defendant failed to articulate how his defense was impaired or how he was prejudiced by the indictment
explaining a “continuing scheme or course of conduct may properly be alleged in a single count”
finding no showing the defense was prejudiced by an allegedly duplicitous indictment when the defendant claimed he had not committed the charged acts
finding no prejudice in trial court’s consideration of improper factors where court imposed the presumptive sentence
affirming presumptive sentence, even when trial court referenced lack of remorse as an aggravating factor, based on the “number of additional aggravating factors the trial court cited”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Pelander, Espinosa, Eckerstrom

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

65 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.