Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Lemieux, 669 P.2d 121.

46 citing documents.

State v. Petkovic Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
State v. Petkovic Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
(interpreting Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.8 which provides a similar evidentiary hearing requirement in post-conviction proceedings).
State v. Coli Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
State v. Coli Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
State v. Patton Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Patton Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984)
State v. Williams Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Williams Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Reyes Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Reyes Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Dwyer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Dwyer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Leininger Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Leininger Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Faccio Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Faccio Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Ramirez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Ramirez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Valdez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Valdez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Cloud Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Cloud Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Johnson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Johnson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
(court views petition’s allegations in light of the entire record to determine if a claim is colorable).
State v. Sanchez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Sanchez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
(in determining whether defendant has stated a colorable claim for relief, allegations are viewed in light of entire record).
State v. Kaul-Arob Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Kaul-Arob Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Soto-Portillo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Soto-Portillo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
(considering the entire record when determining whether the defendant could establish counsel was ineffective).
State v. Urosevic Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Urosevic Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
(court views allegations in petition in light of the entire record to determine if a claim is colorable).
State v. Chairez 327 P.3d 886 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2013
State v. Chairez 327 P.3d 886 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2013
(defendant must establish claim has appearance of validity in that, if factual allegations were true, he would be entitled to relief).
State v. Verdugo 901 P.2d 1165 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
State v. Verdugo 901 P.2d 1165 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
State v. Sasak 871 P.2d 729 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
State v. Sasak 871 P.2d 729 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
(defendant must show missing information actually relevant to decision-making process; where not “of the essence” of the agreement, plea will not be vacated)
State v. Freeland 863 P.2d 263 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
State v. Freeland 863 P.2d 263 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
An evidentiary hearing is not warranted, however, unless defendant asserts a “color-able claim.” , , 17 A.R.S.
State v. Diaz 842 P.2d 617 Ariz. 1992
State v. Diaz 842 P.2d 617 Ariz. 1992
State v. Diaz 835 P.2d 477 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
State v. Diaz 835 P.2d 477 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
State v. Wagstaff 775 P.2d 1130 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
State v. Wagstaff 775 P.2d 1130 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988