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. Just, 675 P.2d 1353.

71 citing documents.

  • State v. Jones Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
  • State v. Jones Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
    -42 (App. 1983); (explaining that a jury’s guilty verdict makes any error in the charging decision harmless), ¶ 25 (2001), -43, ¶¶ 14-20
  • John Christian Hansen, II v. Hon. Chon-Lopez 501 P.3d 762 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2021
  • John Christian Hansen, II v. Hon. Chon-Lopez 501 P.3d 762 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2021
  • Trinh v. Hon garcia/state 486 P.3d 204 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
  • Trinh v. Hon garcia/state 486 P.3d 204 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
    “The grand jury is, of course, free to either grant or deny the defendant’s request, but this choice is for the grand jury and not for the [State].” Trebus, 189 Ariz. at 625 ().
  • Denitang v. Arizona Therapy Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
  • Denitang v. Arizona Therapy Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
  • State v. Libert Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
  • State v. Libert Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
    STATE v. LIBERT Decision of the Court jury determines a defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.” (“[A]fter a full scale trial in which a jury determines guilt beyond a reasonable doubt the question [of whether probable cause exists] is closed.”); –42 (App. 1983) (observing that “once a trial jury has found guilt beyond a reasonable doubt following a proper presentation of both the state’s and the defendant’s evidence, the issue of probable cause to believe the defendant has committed an off
  • State v. Aston Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
  • State v. Aston Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
    Actual memory loss, as compared to feigned memory loss, does not render a prior statement “inconsistent.”
  • State of Arizona v. Rock Kelly Ingram 368 P.3d 936 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
  • State of Arizona v. Rock Kelly Ingram 368 P.3d 936 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
    (defendant cannot challenge grand-jury proceedings on appeal).
  • State v. Bustamante 274 P.3d 526 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
  • State v. Bustamante 274 P.3d 526 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
  • Bashir v. Pineda 248 P.3d 199 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
  • Bashir v. Pineda 248 P.3d 199 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
    ("The purpose of [A.R.S.
  • State v. Munninger 104 P.3d 204 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2005
  • State v. Munninger 104 P.3d 204 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2005
  • ChartOne, Inc. v. Bernini 83 P.3d 1103 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2004
  • Chartone, Inc. v. Mercaldo, Ltd. Webb, Pc. Durazzo & Eckel Smart Professional Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2004
  • ChartOne, Inc. v. Bernini 83 P.3d 1103 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2004
    (trial court has great discretion in controlling conduct of trial); , (“The trial court has full discretion in the conduct of the trial, and that discretion will not be overturned on appeal absent a clear showing of an abuse of discretion.”).
  • Chartone, Inc. v. Mercaldo, Ltd. Webb, Pc. Durazzo & Eckel Smart Professional Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2004
    P.2d 3 (1980) (trial court has great discretion in controlling conduct of trial); State v. Just, 138 Ariz. 534, 550, (“The trial court has full discretion in the conduct of the trial, and that discretion will not be overturned on appeal absent a clear showing of an abuse of discretion.”).
  • State of Arizona v. Jose Uzarraga Alvarez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2003
  • State of Arizona v. Jose Uzarraga Alvarez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2003
    1) based on prior felony convictions); P.2d 603 (App. 1988) (sentence for negligent homicide enhanced under § 13-604(F) for use of gun; deadly weapon not element of offense); P.2d 145 (App. 1984) (threatened use of weapon against police officers both element of offense and aggravating factor under § 13-702(C)(2)); P.2d 1353 (App. 1983) (death of victim both element of offense of second-degree murder and aggravating factor, § 13-702(C)(1); knife properly used to enhance sentence under § 13-604 an
  • State v. Sucharew 66 P.3d 59 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2003
  • State v. Sucharew 66 P.3d 59 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2003
    *21 ¶ 6 “The trial court has full discretion in the conduct of the trial, and that discretion will not be overturned on appeal absent a clear showing of an abuse of discretion.”
  • State v. Ramirez 945 P.2d 376 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
  • Trebus v. Davis 944 P.2d 1235 Ariz. 1997
  • Trebus v. Davis 944 P.2d 1235 Ariz. 1997
    (“The purpose of [A.R.S.
  • State v. Nieto 924 P.2d 453 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
  • State v. Nieto 924 P.2d 453 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
    at 293-94 , 635 P.2d at 1215-16 ; , (even if trial court erroneously denied motion for judgment of acquittal on first degree murder, where strong evidence of second-degree murder of which defendant convicted, error harmless beyond reasonable doubt).
  • Wallace v. CASA GRANDE SC. BD. OF GOV. 909 P.2d 486 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1995
  • Wallace v. CASA GRANDE SC. BD. OF GOV. 909 P.2d 486 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1995
  • 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 aggravate
  • State v. King 873 P.2d 641 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
  • 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
    He argues that the court’s
  • State v. Atwood 832 P.2d 593 Ariz. 1992
  • State v. Atwood 832 P.2d 593 Ariz. 1992
    938, 943 , 89 L.Ed.2d 50 (1986) (petit jury’s guilty verdict rendered harmless any conceivable error in the grand jury’s charging decision caused by alleged violation of rule 6(d), Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure); -42 , -61 (App.1983).
  • State v. Lara 830 P.2d 803 Ariz. 1992
  • State v. Lara 830 P.2d 803 Ariz. 1992
    See, -07 , -07 (App.1988) (negligent homicide); , (second degree murder); , (first degree burglary); , (second degree murder); , (second
  • State v. Perez Lara 823 P.2d 70 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
  • State v. Perez Lara 823 P.2d 70 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
    (death of victim is an appropriate aggravating factor for a second degree murder sentence); , (same); , (death of victim is a proper aggravating factor for negligent homic
  • State v. Anaya 799 P.2d 876 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
  • State v. Anaya 799 P.2d 876 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
  • State v. Howard 785 P.2d 1235 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1989
  • State v. Howard 785 P.2d 1235 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1989