DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Rodriguez, 612 P.2d 1067.

44 citing documents.

  • State of Arizona v. Rey David Villegas 281 P.3d 1059 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
  • State of Arizona v. Rey David Villegas 281 P.3d 1059 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
    ¶6 -06, -69 (App. 1980), -54, -51 (App. 1980), Villegas argues the trial court was required to set aside his plea because the court’s failure to inform him of the “special sentencing provision” of § 13-2308(E) violated Rule 17.2(b) and rend
  • State v. Harrison 985 P.2d 513 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
  • State v. Harrison 985 P.2d 513 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
  • State v. Ochoa 943 P.2d 814 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
  • State v. Ochoa 943 P.2d 814 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
  • State v. Greene 898 P.2d 954 Ariz. 1995
  • State v. Greene 898 P.2d 954 Ariz. 1995
  • State v. Rowan 859 P.2d 737 Ariz. 1993
  • Distinguished State v. Rowan 859 P.2d 737 Ariz. 1993
    which are distinguishable.
  • State v. Pitts 870 P.2d 1155 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
  • State v. Pitts 870 P.2d 1155 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
    (death of victim is a proper aggravating factor for a negligent homicide conviction); , (death of victim and use of a deadly weapon are appropriate aggravating factors for a second degree murder conviction); , (use of a gun can support allegation of dangerousness to enhance punishment for aggravated assault).
  • State v. Greene 866 P.2d 886 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
  • State v. Greene 866 P.2d 886 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
    -07 , -70 (App.1980), we rejected the contention that A.R.S.
  • State v. Elliget 864 P.2d 1064 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
  • State v. Elliget 864 P.2d 1064 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
  • State v. Rowan 848 P.2d 864 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1992
  • State v. Rowan 848 P.2d 864 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1992
    17.2(b), 17 A.R.S., which requires that a defendant admitting a prior conviction be advised of “any special conditions regarding sentencing.”
  • State v. Malone 830 P.2d 842 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
  • State v. Malone 830 P.2d 842 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
    See also, , (state entitled to allege that aggravated assault was a dangerous offense where defendant fired a gun); , (use of automobile can support allegation of dangerousness to enhance punishment for aggravated assault); , (use of a gun can support allegation of dangerousness to enhance punishment for aggravated assault).
  • State v. Glasscock 812 P.2d 1083 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
  • State v. Glasscock 812 P.2d 1083 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
  • State ex rel. Romley v. Hall 821 P.2d 174 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
  • State ex rel. Romley v. Hall 821 P.2d 174 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
    *514 , this court decided the identical point against the defendant, the trial court granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss the allegation of dangerousness.
  • State v. Garcia 799 P.2d 888 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
  • State v. Garcia 799 P.2d 888 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
    (not double jeopardy to use a deadly weapon both to classify the crime as a more serious felony and to enhance the sentence); , (not double jeopardy or double punishment to consider an element of the crime for more than one purpose when determining punishment); , (not double punishment for gun to support both underlying crime and enhanced sentence).
  • State v. Orduno 769 P.2d 1010 Ariz. 1989
  • State v. Orduno 769 P.2d 1010 Ariz. 1989
    P.2d 1 (1980) (not double jeopardy to use a deadly weapon both to classify the crime as a more serious felony and to enhance the sentence); P.2d 279 (1980) (not double jeopardy or double punishment to consider an element of the crime for more than one purpose when determining punishment); , (aggravated assault; not double punishment for gun to support both underlying crime and enhanced sentence).
  • State v. Torrez 687 P.2d 1292 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
  • State v. Torrez 687 P.2d 1292 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
  • State v. Lask 663 P.2d 604 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
  • State v. Lask 663 P.2d 604 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
  • State v. Taylor 660 P.2d 863 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1982
  • State v. Taylor 660 P.2d 863 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1982
  • State v. Rybolt 650 P.2d 1258 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
  • State v. Rybolt 650 P.2d 1258 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
  • State v. Mahler 626 P.2d 593 Ariz. 1981
  • State v. Mahler 626 P.2d 593 Ariz. 1981
  • State v. Martinez 622 P.2d 3 Ariz. 1980
  • State v. Martinez 622 P.2d 3 Ariz. 1980
    See State v. Rodriguez, Ariz.
  • State v. Moore 614 P.2d 332 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980
  • State v. Moore 614 P.2d 332 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980
    If these issues become pertinent in future proceedings in this case, the attention of the court and counsel is directed to the following opinions: State v. Bly, (2 CA-CR 1865, filed February 15, 1980), review granted, No. 4958-PR (April 15, 1980)
  • State v. Bly 621 P.2d 283 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1980
  • State v. Bly 621 P.2d 283 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1980
    104, (upholding imposition of increased punishment Under A.R.S.