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. Aldrich, 251 P.2d 653.

28 citing documents.

  • State v. Nevarez 875 P.2d 184 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
  • State v. Nevarez 875 P.2d 184 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
    530, 532-34 , -87 (1973) (examination of police deputy regarding personal interest proper when evidence showed that defendant previously had injured deputy’s friend); , (examination of police officer as interested witness proper to solicit evidence that officer more than casual friend of victim who encouraged her to bring the charges).
  • Johnson v. Elliott 537 P.2d 927 Ariz. 1975
  • Johnson v. Elliott 537 P.2d 927 Ariz. 1975
    This is equivalent to no objection at all.”
  • State v. Money 514 P.2d 1014 Ariz. 1973
  • State v. Money 514 P.2d 1014 Ariz. 1973
    We have followed that rule of law in several cases since Gomez, , , , 229 P. 939 (1924); , 188 P. 872 (1920), and we have been given.
  • State v. Lockner 513 P.2d 374 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
  • State v. Lockner 513 P.2d 374 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
  • State v. Gregory 501 P.2d 387 Ariz. 1972
  • State v. Gregory 501 P.2d 387 Ariz. 1972
  • State v. Ramos 492 P.2d 697 Ariz. 1972
  • State v. Ramos 492 P.2d 697 Ariz. 1972
  • State v. Briley 476 P.2d 852 Ariz. 1970
  • State v. Briley 476 P.2d 852 Ariz. 1970
  • State v. Gortarez 402 P.2d 992 Ariz. 1965
  • State v. Gortarez 402 P.2d 992 Ariz. 1965
  • State v. Burruell 401 P.2d 733 Ariz. 1965
  • State v. Burruell 401 P.2d 733 Ariz. 1965
    *44 , , this court, in holding it was reversible error not to permit cross-examination of the officer in regard to his acquaintance with defendant’s wife as to whether he had personal reasons for wishing to see defendant in jail, we stated: “It is the law that a defendant in a criminal case should be given wi
  • State v. Balderrama 397 P.2d 632 Ariz. 1964
  • State v. Balderrama 397 P.2d 632 Ariz. 1964
    125 P. 702 , 42 L.R.A., N.S., 975 ; , 100 P. 770 ; , .
  • State v. Hernandez 391 P.2d 586 Ariz. 1964
  • State v. Hernandez 391 P.2d 586 Ariz. 1964
  • State v. Robinson 360 P.2d 474 Ariz. 1961
  • State v. Robinson 360 P.2d 474 Ariz. 1961
  • State v. Holden 352 P.2d 705 Ariz. 1960
  • State v. Holden 352 P.2d 705 Ariz. 1960
    Of such cross-examination, speaking through Phelps, J., , , 657: “It is the law that a defendant in a criminal case should be given wide latitude in cross-examining his prosecutor for the purpose of showing motive, bias or prejudice.
  • State v. Little 350 P.2d 756 Ariz. 1960
  • State v. Little 350 P.2d 756 Ariz. 1960