Cited by
Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Willcoxson, 751 P.2d 1385.
- State v. Alvarez Bojorquez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
-
State v. Alvarez Bojorquez
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Nor must the court make its sentencing decision by comparing “the mere numbers of aggravating or mitigating circumstances.”
- State v. Quinonez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
- State v. Quinonez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
- State v. Matta Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
-
State v. Matta
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
(defendant is not entitled to a Willits instruction “merely because a more exhaustive investigation could have been made”); (“We do not believe that a failure to pursue every lead or gather every conceivable bit of physical evidence will require a Willits instruction.”).
- State v. Democker Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
-
State v. Democker
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
A defendant is not entitled to a Willits instruction in a case like this, “merely because a more exhaustive investigation could have been made.” Murray, 184 Ariz. at 33; (noting that “failure to pursue every lead or gather every conceivable bit of physical evidence” does not require Willits instruction).
- State v. Birchett Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
-
State v. Birchett
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
-95, -55 (1988) (holding that court did not abuse its discretion in denying Willits instruction when similar photographs to those missing were presented at trial); (stating “failure to pursue every lead or gather every conceivable bit of physical evidence” does not require Willits instruction).
- State v. Contreras Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
-
State v. Contreras
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Contreras is not entitled to a Willits instruction “merely because a more exhaustive investigation could have been made.” 8 STATE v. CONTRERAS Decision of the Court (noting “failure to pursue every lead or gather every conceivable bit of physical evidence” does not require a Willits instruction).
- State v. Webster Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
-
State v. Webster
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
(defendant is not entitled to a Willits instruction “merely because a more exhaustive investigation could have been made.”); (“failure to pursue every lead or gather every conceivable bit of physical evidence” does not require Willits instruction).
- State v. Jensen Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
-
State v. Jensen
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
5 STATE v. JENSEN Decision of the Court P.2d at 566 (recognizing a defendant is not entitled to a Willits instruction “merely because a more exhaustive investigation could have been made”); (concluding “a failure to pursue every lead or gather every conceivable bit of physical evidence“ does not require a Willits instruction).
- State v. Featherston Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
- State v. Featherston Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
- State v. Knox Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
-
State v. Knox
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
After all, “in almost every case prosecuted, the claim can be made that the investigation could have been better.” (“Whether [a Willits] instruction is necessary depends on a judgment as to how central the issue is to the case and how much better or more important the ‘missing’ evidence might have been than the evidence that was introduced.”).
- State v. Olmstead 145 P.3d 631 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2006
-
State v. Olmstead
145 P.3d 631
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2006
¶ 6 , the trial court found three mitigating factors and only one aggravating factor.
- State v. Murray 906 P.2d 542 Ariz. 1995
- State v. Murray 906 P.2d 542 Ariz. 1995
- State v. Wideman 798 P.2d 1373 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
- State v. Wideman 798 P.2d 1373 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
- State v. Garcia 787 P.2d 139 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1990
- State v. Garcia 787 P.2d 139 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1990
- State v. Montijo 774 P.2d 1366 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1989
- State v. Montijo 774 P.2d 1366 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1989