Ads
related to: tucson municipal court case search
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The building previously housed the Pima County Superior Court (1930–1977) and later, the Pima County Consolidated Justice Court (1977–2015), which handled lower-level state criminal matters and small claims cases. As of February 2015, court proceedings for Justice Court were held in a newer building shared with other Pima County departments ...
The Arizona Court of Appeals is the intermediate appellate court for the state of Arizona. It is divided into two divisions, with a total of twenty-eight judges on the court: nineteen in Division 1, based in Phoenix, and nine in Division 2, based in Tucson.
A Municipal Magistrate may be appointed as an additional Magistrate in conjunction with his other duties. They do not have civil jurisdiction, they have jurisdiction over any breach of any municipal by-laws per the Municipal Council's Ordinance. Now the local magistrate courts performs the duties of the municipal magistrate courts. [5]
A transgender woman who was assaulted by a male inmate while housed in a men’s unit at an Arizona penitentiary has won a $10,000 judgment in a federal civil rights lawsuit. Grace Pinson, 38, was ...
Argument: Oral argument: Opinion announcement: Opinion announcement: Holding; The Arizona Supreme Court's holding that Lynch v.Arizona was not a significant change in the law is an exceptional case where a state-court judgment rests on such a novel and unforeseeable interpretation of a state-court procedural rule that the decision is not adequate to foreclose review of the federal claim.
Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, 576 U.S. 787 (2015), was a United States Supreme Court case where the Court upheld the right of Arizona voters to remove the authority to draw election districts from the Arizona State Legislature and vest it in an independent redistricting commission. [1]
Arizona v. Gant, 556 U.S. 332 (2009), was a United States Supreme Court decision holding that the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution requires law-enforcement officers to demonstrate an actual and continuing threat to their safety posed by an arrestee, or a need to preserve evidence related to the crime of arrest from tampering by the arrestee, in order to justify a warrantless ...
Arizona v. Johnson, 555 U.S. 323 (2009), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held, by unanimous decision, that police may conduct a pat down search of a passenger in an automobile that has been lawfully stopped for a minor traffic violation, provided the police reasonably suspect the passenger is armed and dangerous.
Ad
related to: tucson municipal court case search