DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Cook, 575 P.2d 353.

16 citing documents.

  • State v. Gomez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
  • State v. Dressig Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
  • State v. Dressig Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
    See, (when the record provided an insufficient basis to determine whether a defendant was advised of rights articulated in Rule 9.1, a remand for an evidentiary hearing was necessary); (remanding for hearing to determine circumstances surrounding defendant’s absence), supplemented
  • State of Arizona v. Vincent Michael Allen 326 P.3d 339 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
  • State of Arizona v. Vincent Michael Allen 326 P.3d 339 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
    entry of judgment and sentence.” 174 Ariz. LXXXVI (1993); -53, -68 (1980) (holding defendant who voluntarily absents himself may be sentenced in absentia); -49, -100 (App. 1977), supp. op., 575 P.2d And, the committee comment to the 1993 amendment to Rule 26.9 provides: “The 1993 amendment to Rule 26.9 deleted language to comply with [our supreme court’s] decision prohibiting sentencing in absentia.” 7 STATE v. ALLEN
  • State v. Walker 95 P.3d 555 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
  • State v. Walker 95 P.3d 555 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
    with the court____The appellant failed to do so in this case, and she cannot benefit from her misconduct by manipulating a rule designed for her protection.”) (citation omitted); , ("Cook I"), supplemented, , (“Cook II"), and overruled in part on other grounds, , ("[W]e cannot be certain that [defendant’s] failure to appear at trial or sentencing indicates a willful intent to frustrate the criminal process or a desire not to be present at a time wh
  • State v. Muniz-Caudillo 914 P.2d 1353 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1996
  • State v. Muniz-Caudillo 914 P.2d 1353 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1996
  • State Ex Rel. Romley v. Superior Court 901 P.2d 1169 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
  • State Ex Rel. Romley v. Superior Court 901 P.2d 1169 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
    (“Cook I ”), supplemented, , (“Cook II”), and overruled in part on other grounds, , see also State v. Pena, 25 Ariz.App.
  • State v. Fettis 664 P.2d 208 Ariz. 1983
  • State v. Fettis 664 P.2d 208 Ariz. 1983
  • State v. Pyeatt 659 P.2d 1286 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
  • State v. Pyeatt 659 P.2d 1286 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
    supplemented , Johnson v. State ex rel.
  • State v. Tapp 653 P.2d 6 Ariz. 1982