State v. Valdez

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 identity fraud statute contains a proof of value element” and that “[t]he State must . . . prove beyond a reasonable doubt, at trial, the value of what was attained”
• stating that “the identity fraud statute contains a proof of value element” and that “[t]he State must . . . prove beyond a reasonable doubt, at trial, the value of what was attained”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

3 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Rodriguez-Heredia v. Holder
  Tenth Circuit· 2011-05-10· cited 30×
• State v. Jensen
  Court of Appeals of Utah· 2004-12-16· cited 4×
• Rodriguez-Heredia v. Holder, Jr.
  Tenth Circuit· 2011-04-15

Cites

8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Riegel v. Medtronic, Inc.
  Supreme Court· 2008-02-20· cited 735×
• State v. Bluff
  Utah Supreme Court· 2002-07-19· cited 85×
• State v. Shondel
  Utah Supreme Court· 1969-04-10· cited 78×
• State v. Fedorowicz
  Utah Supreme Court· 2002-07-19· cited 78×
• State v. Gomez
  Utah Supreme Court· 1986-05-06· cited 15×
• Grinbergs v. United States
  Supreme Court· 2008-01-07· cited 12×
• Straley v. Halliday
  Court of Appeals of Utah· 2000-02-17· cited 8×
• State v. Green
  Court of Appeals of Utah· 2000-02-10· cited 8×