State v. Taylor

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding present tense use in statute and rule means only defendant's current financial resources relevant to determining amount of reimbursement for public defender representation
• concluding present tense use in 5 statute and rule means only defendant‟s current financial resources relevant to determining amount of reimbursement for public defender representation

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

9 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Moreno-Medrano
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2008-06-17· cited 73×
• State v. Bejarano
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2008-12-12· cited 30×
• State v. Guadagni
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2008-02-29· cited 16×
• State of Arizona v. Adolfo Noel Ruiz, Jr.
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2014-11-25· cited 13×
• State of Arizona v. Jeffrey Lee Hinden
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2010-06-04
• State of Arizona v. Anthony Sanchez Bejarano
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2008-12-12
• State of Arizona v. Luis Alberto Moreno-Medrano
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2008-06-17
• State of Arizona v. Donald Allen Guadagni
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2008-02-29
• In re Cotter
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2018-06-21

Cites

19 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Gideon v. Wainwright
  Supreme Court· 1963-03-18· cited 7,325×
• State v. Chapple
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1983-01-11· cited 423×
• Fuller v. Oregon
  Supreme Court· 1974-05-20· cited 365×
• Janson v. Christensen
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1991-04-05· cited 196×
• State v. Korzep
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1990-10-04· cited 120×
• State v. Wise
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1983-10-18· cited 79×
• State v. Watton
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1990-06-07· cited 73×
• State v. Birmingham
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1964-04-14· cited 49×
• Felder v. Physiotherapy Associates
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2007-05-22· cited 39×
• State v. Ward
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2005-09-08· cited 27×
• Schwartz v. SUPERIOR CT. IN MARICOPA CTY.
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1996-09-24· cited 21×
• DeCamp v. Central Arizona Light & Power Co.
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1936-05-01· cited 19×
• State v. Oehlerking
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1985-09-12· cited 17×
• Sedillo v. City of Flagstaff
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1987-02-03· cited 15×
• State v. Lopez
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1993-05-25· cited 11×
• State v. Miller
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1975-05-14· cited 10×
• Ming v. Woolfolk
  Montana Supreme Court· 1879-01-15· cited 8×
• Espinoza v. Superior Court
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1991-01-03· cited 7×
• State v. Keswick
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1984-01-05· cited 5×