Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. McLemore, 288 P.3d 775.

34 citing documents.

State v. Olson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
State v. Olson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
(quoting Cornell, 179 Ariz. at 324); ¶ 23 (App. 2012) (“Failing to engage in a particular colloquy with a defendant, failing to warn a defendant of ‘every possible strategic consideration’ of proceeding pro se, or failing to have the defendant sign the written waiver provided for by Rule 6 is not necessarily reversible error.”).
State of Arizona v. Dewayne Esaw 554 P.3d 14 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2024
State of Arizona v. Dewayne Esaw 554 P.3d 14 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2024
It asked the trial court to maintain the current trial date, but to hold a hearing and engage in a colloquy with Esaw pursuant to Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (1975)
State v. Atondo-Renteria Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
State v. Atondo-Renteria Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
State v. Pavey Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Pavey Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 819 (1975); Ariz. Const. art. 2, § 24; ¶ 14 (App. 2012).
State of Arizona v. Miguel Rios 502 P.3d 474 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2021
State of Arizona v. Miguel Rios 502 P.3d 474 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2021
is structural error requiring reversal without a showing of prejudice.”
State v. Helman Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
State v. Helman Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
–75, ¶¶ 11–13 (App. 2012).
State v. Ibeabuchi 461 P.3d 432 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State v. Ibeabuchi 461 P.3d 432 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
“However, regardless of the standard of review, an erroneous failure to accord a defendant his properly asserted right to represent himself when he is competent to waive counsel in a criminal case is structural error requiring reversal without a showing of prejudice.” -76, ¶ 15 (App. 2012).
State v. De Groote Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. De Groote Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
–77, ¶ 17 (App. 2012) (competent); (citation omitted) (unequivocal); ¶ 8 (2016) (citation omitted) (knowing and voluntary); ¶ 9 (App. 2018) (timely).
State v. Schulte Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Schulte Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
“[A]n erroneous failure to accord a defendant his properly asserted right to represent himself when he is competent to waive counsel in a criminal case is structural error requiring reversal without a showing of prejudice.” -76 ¶ 15 (App. 2012).
Aaron L. v. Dcs, S.L. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Aaron L. v. Dcs, S.L. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
However, “the absence of an explicit finding of a knowing, intelligent, voluntary waiver of counsel” is not “reversible error where the record as a whole supported a finding of constitutional waiver.” n.12, ¶ 23 (App. 2012).
State v. Davis Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Davis Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Weaver 418 P.3d 468 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2018
State v. Weaver 418 P.3d 468 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2018
State v. McLemore , , ¶ 15
State v. Walker Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Walker Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Rustin Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Rustin Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
See, -76, ¶ 15, -80 (App. 2012) (“[A]n erroneous failure to accord a defendant his properly asserted right to represent himself when he is competent to waive counsel in a criminal case is structural error requiring reversal without a showing of prejudice.”) (emphasis added).
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
State v. Osborne Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Osborne Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
¶ 36, (noting defendant abandoned a motion by not asking the court to rule on that motion or objecting to court’s proceeding without ruling on that motion, despite several opportunities to do so).
State v. Morgan Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Morgan Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
¶ 15, (stating that this court reviews for an abuse of discretion the trial court’s finding that a defendant has waived his right to counsel and the court’s decision denying a defendant the right to proceed pro se).