ISIAH HILL v. STATE OF ARIZONA
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOTICE: THIS DECISION DOES NOT CREATE LEGAL PRECEDENT AND MAY NOT BE CITED EXCEPT AS AUTHORIZED BY APPLICABLE RULES. See Ariz. R. Supreme Court 111(c); ARCAP 28(c); Ariz. R. Crim. P. 31.24 FILED BY CLERK JUL 16 2013 COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION TWO IN THE COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF ARIZONA DIVISION TWO ISIAH HILL, Petitioner/Appellant, v. THE STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent/Appellee. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 2 CA-HC 2013-0006 DEPARTMENT A MEMORANDUM DECISION Not for Publication Rule 28, Rules of Civil Appellate Procedure APPEAL FROM THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PINAL COUNTY Cause No. S1100CV201202893 Honorable Bradley M. Soos, Judge Pro Tempore APPEAL DISMISSED Isiah Hill Florence In Propria Persona V à S Q U E Z, Presiding Judge. ¶1 Isiah Hill appeals from the trial court s dismissal without prejudice of his petition for writ of mandamus, in which he sought release from custody. Although Hill asserts jurisdiction is proper pursuant to A.R.S. §§ 12-120, et seq. and 12-2101, this court has an independent duty to determine whether it has jurisdiction over an appeal. McMurray v. Dream Catcher USA, Inc., 220 Ariz. 71, ¶ 4, 202 P.3d 536, 539 (App. 2009). A dismissal without prejudice is not an appealable order where, as here, it is not a final determination of the controversy on its merits, and is no bar to the prosecution of another suit timely commenced, founded upon the same cause of action. State ex rel. Hess v. Boehringer, 16 Ariz. 48, 51, 141 P. 126, 127 (1914); cf. Garza v. Swift Transp. Co., 222 Ariz. 281, ¶ 15, 213 P.3d 1008, 1011 (2009) (noting exception to final judgment rule, codified in § 12-2101(A)(3), where non-final order in effect determines the action, as any refiled action would be barred by statute of limitations), quoting McMurray, 220 Ariz. 71, ¶ 4, 202 P.3d at 539. Because the trial court s order dismissing Hill s petition without prejudice is not appealable, we lack jurisdiction to consider his appeal. McMurray, 220 Ariz. 71, ¶ 4, 202 P.3d at 539. ¶2 Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed. /s/ Garye L. Vásquez GARYE L. Và SQUEZ, Presiding Judge CONCURRING: /s/ Joseph W. Howard JOSEPH W. HOWARD, Chief Judge /s/ Michael Miller MICHAEL MILLER, Judge 2
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.
