State v. Nixon
| Decision Date | 06 December 1966 |
| Docket Number | CA-CR,No. 1,1 |
| Citation | 420 P.2d 979,4 Ariz.App. 407 |
| Parties | STATE of Arizona, Appellee, v. Vincent E. NIXON, Appellant. 20. |
| Court | Arizona Court of Appeals |
Barry Leverant, Phoenix, for appellee.
Minne & Sorenson, by Roger J. Blake, Phoenix, for appellant.
This opinion relates to the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeals to entertain a certified question.
It is appropriate for a court to inquire into its jurisdiction. There are two general areas of inquiry in relation to this case. The first, as in Searles v. Haldiman, 3 Ariz.App. 294, 413 P.2d 860 (1966), relates to whether the action of the trial court is appealable to this Court or the Supreme Court. The second, as in State v. Mileham, 1 Ariz.App. 67, 399 P.2d 688 (1965), relates to the jurisdiction of this Court of entertain a matter which is in itself an appealable matter. The former situation concerns the appealability of the matter and the latter concerns this Court's power to consider a matter which is otherwise appealable. The principles governing the situation before us fall within the second category. This opinion is one of three opinions rendered this date touching upon the jurisdiction of this Court, the other two cases being Welsh & Sons v. Arizona State Tax Commission, 4 Ariz.App. 398, 420 P.2d 970 and Industrial Commission v. Harbor Insurance Company, 4 Ariz.App. 405, 420 P.2d 977.
A question was certified to this Court by a Judge of the Superior Court relying upon Rule 346 of the Rules of Criminal Procedure, 17 A.R.S. This opinion relates to the propriety of the exercise of jurisdiction by this Court. The criminal case, out of which the certification issued, is not one within the excluded jurisdiction as set forth in amended Sections 12--120.21, subsec. A, par. 2 and 13--1711, A.R.S., which sections were considered in Mileham.
The Rules of Criminal Procedure in their present form were adopted by the Supreme Court in 1955. The order adopting and promulgating the rules stated in part:
'That the Rules of Criminal Procedure for the Superior Courts of the State of Arizona hereto annexed be and they are hereby adopted and promulgated as Rules of Criminal Procedure for the Superior Courts of the State of Arizona.'
Under conditions set forth in Rule 346,
'* * * the trial court may * * * certify the case to the supreme court * * * and thereupon all proceedings in the action shall be stayed to await the decision of the supreme court.'
In the case of State v. May, 1 Ariz.App. 452, 404, P.2d 718 (1965), we gave consideration to our jurisdiction to answer a certified question and concluded the presence of jurisdiction. The case was not reviewed by the Arizona Supreme Court.
There has been an exchange of official correspondence in relation to a matter originally lodged with Division Two of this Court relative to the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeals to entertain an application for stay of execution of a sentence under Criminal Rule 354, subd. B. The Rule authorizes the stay of execution on...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Crouch v. Justice of Peace Court of Sixth Precinct
...State v. Mileham, 1 Ariz.App. 67, 399 P.2d 688 (1965); State v. Sheppard, 2 Ariz.App. 242, 407 P.2d 783 (1965) and State v. Nixon, 4 Ariz.App. 407, 420 P.2d 979 (1966). In Mileham and Nixon, the Court of Appeals held that it was without jurisdiction, the same not having been granted by stat......
-
State v. Nixon
...to the Supreme Court after finding that it, the Court of Appeals, may not entertain Criminal Rule 346 matters. State v. Nixon, 4 Ariz.App. 407, 420 P.2d 979. Rule 346 of the Rules of Criminal Procedure provides that '* * * the trial court may * * * certify the case to the Supreme Court * * ......
-
Industrial Commission v. Harbor Ins. Co.
...in which formal opinions are being filed this day in relation to the jurisdiction of the Court. The other two cases are State v. Nixon, 4 Ariz.App. 407, 420 P.2d 979 and Welsh & Sons v. Arizona State Tax Commission, 4 Ariz.App. 398, 420 P.2d 970. Reference is also made to the cases of State......