State v. Sanchez

How courts have described this case

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

• finding the denial of a defendant’s request to expunge his record was “an order made after judgment that affect[ed] his substantial rights”
• “We presume that . . . if [the legislature] wants to limit the application of a statute, it does so expressly.”
• an unresolvable ambiguity should be read in favor of the defendant

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

15 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Yarbrough v. Montoya-Paez
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2006-11-06· cited 34×
• Taylor v. Cruikshank
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2006-11-30· cited 31×
• State v. Mangum
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2007-01-12· cited 31×
• Cicoria v. Cole
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2009-09-10· cited 22×
• State of Arizona v. Joann Bon
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2014-11-28· cited 18×
• DaimlerChrysler Services North America, LLC v. Arizona Department of Revenue
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2005-05-03· cited 8×
• State of Arizona v. Jeremy Allen Matlock
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2015-05-27· cited 7×
• Jane Doe I & II; And John Doe... v. Shaunice Warr
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2025-03-21· cited 4×
• State v. Furlong
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2020-08-20· cited 2×
• State v. Farid
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2020-07-28· cited 1×
• State of Arizona v. Walter James Mangum
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2007-01-12
• Olin Gene Taylor, John Adrian Johnson v. State of Arizona
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2006-11-30
• YARBROUGH v. ROBERTS ENTERPRISES, DeWITT, AVATOR HOLDINGS
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2006-11-06
• State v. Farid
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2020-07-23
• State of Arizona v. Jose Soto
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2026-03-04