Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Zamora, 202 P.3d 528.

71 citing documents.

State v. Sanchez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Posey Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Posey Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Coven 340 P.3d 1101 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Coven 340 P.3d 1101 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Sherri C. v. Dcs, T.O. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Sherri C. v. Dcs, T.O. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
only if the implied findings do not conflict with the court’s express findings.” ¶ 7
State v. Bruce Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Bruce Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Joslin G. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Joslin G. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
“We will infer the necessary findings to affirm” the juvenile court’s order, so long as those “implied findings do not conflict with the court’s express findings.” ¶ 7, (citations omitted).
State v. Martinez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Martinez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Humelhans Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Humelhans Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
-68, ¶ 10, -33 (App. 2009).
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
Miranda’s protections, however, “apply only to custodial interrogation.” (“Police are free to ask questions of a person who is not in custody without having to give the person any warnings under Miranda.”).
State of Arizona v. Angel Antonio Perez 308 P.3d 1189 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2013
State of Arizona v. Angel Antonio Perez 308 P.3d 1189 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2013
State v. Peterson 267 P.3d 1197 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2011
State v. Peterson 267 P.3d 1197 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2011