Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Klokic, 196 P.3d 844.

93 citing documents.

State v. Millis 391 P.3d 1225 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2017
¶ 25 Millis argues even if child abuse under § 13-3623(A)(1) is a single unified offense, he suffered a , because the state introduced evidence of multiple acts to support the child abuse charge that were not part of the same criminal transaction.
State v. Carson 391 P.3d 1198 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2017
State v. Carson 391 P.3d 1198 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2017
¶¶ 6, 8 , -46 (App. 2008) (defendant received justification instructions despite also arguing he never pointed gun at victim).
State v. R.W. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. R.W. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Connatser Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Connatser Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Deshaies Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Deshaies Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
¶ 12, (citation omitted).
State of Arizona v. Bruce Wayne O'Laughlin Jr. 372 P.3d 342 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
State of Arizona v. Bruce Wayne O'Laughlin Jr. 372 P.3d 342 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
State v. Wagner Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Wagner Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
¶ 12, (stating, “[w]hen the text of an indictment refers only to one criminal act, but multiple alleged criminal acts are introduced to prove the charge, our supreme court has sometimes referred to this problem in shorthand as a duplicitous charge rather than a duplicitous indictmen
State v. Higuera Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Higuera Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
“When the text of an indictment refers only to one criminal act, but multiple alleged criminal acts are introduced to prove the charge, our supreme court has sometimes referred to this problem in shorthand as a duplicitous charge rather than a duplicitous indictment.” ¶ 12
State of Arizona v. Penny Ann West 362 P.3d 1049 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2015
State of Arizona v. Penny Ann West 362 P.3d 1049 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2015
15 STATE v. WEST Opinion of the Court Jury Instructions ¶31 Penny also contends the trial court erred by denying her motion for a P.3d 844 (App. 2008).
State of Arizona v. Andy Daniel Almeida 356 P.3d 822 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2015
State of Arizona v. Andy Daniel Almeida 356 P.3d 822 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2015
See, ¶¶ 2-4, 15, 847 (App. 2008).
State v. Cramer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Cramer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State of Arizona v. David J. Waller 333 P.3d 806 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
State of Arizona v. David J. Waller 333 P.3d 806 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
The indictment, therefore, was not duplicitous.9
State v. Patton Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Patton Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
¶15 “A duplicitous charge exists ‘[w]hen the text of an indictment refers only to one criminal act, but multiple alleged criminal acts are introduced to prove the charge.’” ¶ 4, ( ¶ 12, ).
State v. Curtis Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Curtis Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Espinoza Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Espinoza Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State of Arizona v. Travis Hamilton Nereim 317 P.3d 646 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
State of Arizona v. Travis Hamilton Nereim 317 P.3d 646 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
Factual and Procedural Background ¶2 “On appeal, we view the facts in the light most favorable to upholding the verdict and resolve all inferences against the defendant.” n.1, n.1 (App. 2008).
State of Arizona v. Christopher Mathew Payne 306 P.3d 17 Ariz. 2013
State of Arizona v. Christopher Mathew Payne 306 P.3d 17 Ariz. 2013
State of Arizona v. Manuel Alejandro Delgado 303 P.3d 76 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2013
State of Arizona v. Manuel Alejandro Delgado 303 P.3d 76 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2013
Duplicitous Information or Charge ¶18 Delgado additionally argues this court should reverse his convictions because “fundamental error resulted from a duplicitous information and duplicitous charges to the jury.” A duplicitous information charges two or more distinct crimes in the same count, and is “forbidden because it does not provide ‘adequate notice of the charge to be defended, .
State of Arizona v. Rohan Livingston Butler 286 P.3d 1074 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
State of Arizona v. Rohan Livingston Butler 286 P.3d 1074 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
STATE OF ARIZONA v. STEVE FRANK McPHERSON 269 P.3d 1181 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
STATE OF ARIZONA v. STEVE FRANK McPHERSON 269 P.3d 1181 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
3 “A duplicitous charge exists „[w]hen the text of an indictment refers only to one criminal act, but multiple alleged criminal acts are introduced to prove the charge.‟” (alteration in Paredes-Solano).
State of Arizona v. Jerrold Dean Broman 265 P.3d 1101 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2011
State of Arizona v. Jerrold Dean Broman 265 P.3d 1101 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2011
Similar problems relating to notice, jeopardy, and unanimity arise from duplicitous charges.2
State of Arizona v. Maxamilano Paredes-Solano Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2009
State of Arizona v. Maxamilano Paredes-Solano Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2009
A duplicitous charge exists “[w]hen the text of an indictment refers only to one criminal act, but multiple alleged criminal acts are introduced to prove the charge.”

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by