Cited by
Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Boozer, 291 P.2d 786.
- State v. Kummer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
-
State v. Kummer
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
¶41 Finally, “‘it is the universal rule that if improper statements are made by counsel during the trial it is the duty of opposing counsel to register an objection thereto so that the court may make a correction by proper instruction.’” Gonzales, 105 Ariz. at 437, 466 P.2d at 391 ( ); see also Hughes, 104 Ariz. at 538, 456 P.2d at 396 (noting no authority “for the proposition that 14 STATE v. KUMMER Decision of the Court the prosecutor should argue the defendant’s case
- Villalpando v. Reagan 121 P.3d 172 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2005
-
Villalpando v. Reagan
121 P.3d 172
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2005
Without any evidence, and Villalpando concedes that she has none, we will “assume that [a] prosecutor [is] acting in good faith.”
- State v. Mitchell 62 P.3d 616 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2003
- State v. Mitchell 62 P.3d 616 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2003
- State v. Mitchell 683 P.2d 750 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1984
- State v. Mitchell 683 P.2d 750 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1984
- State v. Rose 589 P.2d 5 Ariz. 1978
- State v. Rose 589 P.2d 5 Ariz. 1978
- State v. Valencia 575 P.2d 335 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1977
- State v. Valencia 575 P.2d 335 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1977
- State v. Cook 564 P.2d 877 Ariz. 1977
- State v. Valenzuela 559 P.2d 201 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1977
-
State v. Valenzuela
559 P.2d 201
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1977
State v. Vanderlinden, 21 Ariz.App.
- State v. Houlf 557 P.2d 565 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1976
- State v. Houlf 557 P.2d 565 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1976
- State v. Arredondo 526 P.2d 163 Ariz. 1974
- State v. Arredondo 526 P.2d 163 Ariz. 1974
- State v. Parker 524 P.2d 506 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1974
-
State v. Parker
524 P.2d 506
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1974
The established rule in Arizona is that if improper statements are made by counsel during the trial, the opposition must object so that the court may make the necessary correction by proper instruction
- State v. Juarez 524 P.2d 155 Ariz. 1974
- State v. Juarez 524 P.2d 155 Ariz. 1974
- State v. Jaramillo 520 P.2d 1105 Ariz. 1974
-
State v. Jaramillo
520 P.2d 1105
Ariz. 1974
State v. Williams, supra.
- State v. Woodward 516 P.2d 589 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
- State v. Woodward 516 P.2d 589 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
- State v. Taylor 508 P.2d 731 Ariz. 1973
- State v. Taylor 508 P.2d 731 Ariz. 1973
- State v. Colson 499 P.2d 726 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1972
- State v. Colson 499 P.2d 726 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1972
- State v. Williams 485 P.2d 832 Ariz. 1971
- State v. Williams 485 P.2d 832 Ariz. 1971
- State v. Harris 481 P.2d 504 Ariz. 1971
-
State v. Harris
481 P.2d 504
Ariz. 1971
294 P. 617 (1930); , 137 P. 550 (1913).
- State v. Adair 470 P.2d 671 Ariz. 1970
- State v. Adair 470 P.2d 671 Ariz. 1970
- State v. Gonzales 466 P.2d 388 Ariz. 1970
-
State v. Gonzales
466 P.2d 388
Ariz. 1970
: “ * * * it is the universal rule that if improper statements are made by counsel during the trial it is the duty of opposing counsel to register an objection thereto so that the court may make a correction, by proper instruction and, if the offense be sufficiently hurtful, declare a mistrial.” 8
- State v. White 465 P.2d 602 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1970
- State v. White 465 P.2d 602 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1970
- State v. Stout 425 P.2d 582 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1967
- State v. Stout 425 P.2d 582 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1967
- State v. Miranda 416 P.2d 444 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1966
- State v. Miranda 416 P.2d 444 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1966
- State v. Sowards 406 P.2d 202 Ariz. 1965
- State v. Sowards 406 P.2d 202 Ariz. 1965
- State v. Mills 396 P.2d 5 Ariz. 1964
- State v. Mills 396 P.2d 5 Ariz. 1964
- State v. Hernandez 391 P.2d 586 Ariz. 1964