Also known as: affirmed
Written by attorneys — see sources below.
An abbreviation used in legal citations to indicate that an appellate court has affirmed the judgment or decision of a lower court.
Andre Antoine signed a written post-marriage agreement waiving his elective share rights in exchange for a lump-sum payment. After his spouse's death the probate court enforced the agreement against his later petition. The appellate court reviewed the signed writing and the lack of duress and aff'd the enforcement order.
Austin Abbott sent a signed letter offering to sell land before any formal contract existed. The buyer later accepted orally and the seller refused to perform. The trial court held the pre-contract letter satisfied the statute and the appeals court aff'd that ruling.
Alexis Archer sued a newspaper for false light after a substantially true article appeared. The trial court dismissed the claim on constitutional grounds. The appellate court aff'd the dismissal because the reporting fell within protected speech.
Ariana Azizi signed a spousal waiver without separate legal advice or a plain-language explanation of rights. The probate court refused to enforce the agreement. On appeal the reviewing court aff'd the refusal under the statutory safeguards.
Anthony Arnold lost the only signed memorandum of an oral land contract. He offered an unsigned copy and witness testimony at trial. The court admitted the evidence and held the statute satisfied. The appeals court aff'd that result.
Ava Adebayo moved to suppress a statement taken without Miranda warnings. The district court granted suppression. The court of appeals aff'd the order because the warnings were required before custodial interrogation.
In March 1963 Ernesto Miranda was arrested at his home in Phoenix and taken to the police station where he was identified by the complaining witness. He was then questioned by two officers in Interrogation Room No. 2 for two hours. The officers did not advise him of any right to counsel. Miranda signed a typed confession that was introduced at his trial for kidnapping and rape. On October 14 1960 Michael Vignera was arrested in connection with a Brooklyn robbery. He was taken first to the 17th Detective Squad headquarters in Manhattan and later to the 66th Detective Squad. A detective questioned him for several hours without any advice concerning counsel. Vignera made an oral admission. He was then questioned by an assistant district attorney whose transcribed statement was also introduced at his trial for first-degree robbery. On March 20 1963 Carl Calvin Westover was arrested by Kansas City police as a suspect in two local robberies. Kansas City police interrogated Westover on the night of his arrest. The next day local officers interrogated him again throughout the morning. Westover was then turned over to FBI agents who questioned him for two to two-and-a-half hours about California robberies and obtained signed confessions. At the time the FBI agents began questioning Westover he had been in custody for over fourteen hours. On January 31 1963 Roy Allen Stewart was arrested at his home in connection with a series of purse-snatch robberies. During the next five days police interrogated Stewart on nine different occasions without any advice of rights. On the ninth session Stewart confessed. Transcripts of the interrogations were introduced at his trial for kidnapping rape and murder. The Arizona Supreme Court affirmed Miranda's conviction. The New York courts affirmed Vignera's conviction. The Ninth Circuit affirmed Westover's conviction. The California Supreme Court reversed Stewart's conviction. The Supreme Court granted certiorari in the four cases and consolidated them for argument.
View caseIt signals that an appellate court has affirmed the lower court's decision without change.
Yes. The abbreviation follows the citation of the decision being reviewed and precedes the appellate citation.
No. When the appellate court changes the result the proper abbreviation is aff'd in part or rev'd in part.
…defendant signed a typed confession. At his trial, this confession was admitted over his objection. The Arizona Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that the defendant’s constitutional rights were not violated. In Vignera v. New York , the defendant was arrested in connection with a robbery. He was taken to the…