In re to the Detention of Wilber W.

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA In re the Detention of: ) ) WILBER W. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ____________________________) Arizona Supreme Court No. CV-02-0328-PR Court of Appeals Division One No. 1 CA-MH 01-0008 SP Mohave County Superior Court No. CV 2000-0152 O P I N I O N Appeal from the Superior Court of Mohave County No. CV 2000-0152 The Honorable James E. Chavez, Judge REMANDED ______________________________________________________________ ___ Opinion of the Court of Appeals Division One 203 Ariz. 301, 53 P.3d 1145 (App. 2002) VACATED ______________________________________________________________ ___ Janet Napolitano, Former Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard, Attorney General by Randall M. Howe, Chief Counsel, Criminal Appeals Section and Diane M. Acosta, Assistant Attorney General Criminal Appeals Section Attorneys for State of Arizona Eric J. Engan, P.C. by Eric J. Engan Attorney for Wilber W. Phoenix Tucson Kingman ______________________________________________________________ ___ M c G R E G O R, Vice Chief Justice ¶1 We granted review to consider the opinion of the Court of Appeals in light of our decision in In re Leon G., ___ Ariz. ___, 59 P.3d 779 (2002). We exercise jurisdiction pursuant to Article VI, Section 5 of the Arizona Constitution. ¶2 Although the analysis in In re Wilber W., 203 Ariz. 301, 53 P.3d 1145 (App. 2002), largely anticipated our decision in In re Leon G., minor areas of disagreement exist between the two decisions. For that reason, we vacate the opinion of the Court of Appeals and remand this matter to the Superior Court for further proceedings consistent with In re Leon G. We also vacate as moot the stay previously entered. _________________________ Ruth V. McGregor Vice Chief Justice CONCURRING: _______________________________ Charles E. Jones, Chief Justice _______________________________ Rebecca White Berch, Justice _______________________________ Michael D. Ryan, Justice

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.