8 ARIZAPP 444 - State v. Valenzuela

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently July 2006

6 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

MOLLOY, Judge.

¶1The only question raised on this appeal is whether an accused can be convicted and punished for both grand theft and burglary when the offenses charged arise out of the same series of occurrences.

¶2The appellant concedes that the decision of State v. Hutton, 87 Ariz. 176, 349 P.2d 187 (1960), is directly in point and unfavorable to his contention. He asks that this decision he overruled on the authority of People v. McFarland, 58 Cal.2d 748, 26 Cal.Rptr. 473, 376 P.2d 449 (1962).

¶3Our Supreme Court considered a similar contention in State v. Green, 98 Ariz. 254, 403 P.2d 809 (1965), and refused to recede from the rationale of its prior decisions in Hutton, supra, and State v. Vallejos, 89 Ariz. 76, 358 P.2d 178 (1960).

¶4We neither have the inclination nor the authority to overrule the established law of this state on this subject. See State v. Forteson, 8 Ariz.App. 468, 447 P.2d 560 (1968) (released simultaneously with this opinion).

¶5Judgment affirmed.

HATHAWAY, C. J., and KRUCKER, J., concur.