Cited by
Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Preis, 362 P.2d 660.
- State v. Edwards 677 P.2d 1325 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
- State v. Edwards 677 P.2d 1325 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
- State v. Skaggs 586 P.2d 1279 Ariz. 1978
-
State v. Skaggs
586 P.2d 1279
Ariz. 1978
283 P. 711 (1929); , 136 P. 276 (1913); , 60 P. 876 (1900).
- State v. Rodriguez 560 P.2d 1238 Ariz. 1977
-
State v. Rodriguez
560 P.2d 1238
Ariz. 1977
“Generally, the intent with which a crime or act is committed may be implied from the facts that establish the doing of the act, and a specific intent may at times be presumed from the conduct of the accused in the doing of the act, as in cases involving an intent to kill.” , , , cert.
- State v. Harwood 519 P.2d 177 Ariz. 1974
-
State v. Harwood
519 P.2d 177
Ariz. 1974
We said, however, , : “While the presumption may take the place of proof and be prevailing in the absence of any evidence to the contrary, the presumption is not one of law; it is to be drawn by the jury as a matter of fact.
- Cavanagh v. Ohio Farmers Insurance Company 509 P.2d 1075 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1973
- Cavanagh v. Ohio Farmers Insurance Company 509 P.2d 1075 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1973
- State v. Brierly 509 P.2d 203 Ariz. 1973
-
State v. Brierly
509 P.2d 203
Ariz. 1973
This instruction is in accord with ARS § 13-454
- State v. Young 508 P.2d 51 Ariz. 1973
- State v. Young 508 P.2d 51 Ariz. 1973
- State v. Dixon 489 P.2d 225 Ariz. 1971
- State v. Dixon 489 P.2d 225 Ariz. 1971
- State v. Mojarro Padilla 483 P.2d 549 Ariz. 1971
- State v. Michael 483 P.2d 541 Ariz. 1971
- State v. Michael 483 P.2d 541 Ariz. 1971
- State v. Mojarro Padilla 483 P.2d 549 Ariz. 1971
- State v. Mancini 481 P.2d 864 Ariz. 1971
- State v. Mancini 481 P.2d 864 Ariz. 1971
- State v. Sellers 475 P.2d 722 Ariz. 1970
- State v. Sellers 475 P.2d 722 Ariz. 1970
- State v. Scott 452 P.2d 699 Ariz. 1969
-
State v. Scott
452 P.2d 699
Ariz. 1969
347 , 13 L.Ed.2d 350 ; , .” There is no contradiction in the evidence that the appellant walked to the car, fired a pistol directly at his girlfriend and her daughter, and after the pistol was emptied continued to pull the trigger.
- State v. Prewitt 452 P.2d 500 Ariz. 1969
- State v. Prewitt 452 P.2d 500 Ariz. 1969
- State v. Stevenson 452 P.2d 106 Ariz. 1969
-
State v. Stevenson
452 P.2d 106
Ariz. 1969
with regard to confessions we said: “The only thing required is that it must appear to the reasonable satisfaction of the trial court that the confession was not obtained by threats, coercion or promises of immunity.” Again, at 88 , at 299
- State v. Anthony 449 P.2d 598 Ariz. 1969
-
State v. Anthony
449 P.2d 598
Ariz. 1969
347 , 13 L. Ed.2d 350 ; , .
- State v. Clark 434 P.2d 636 Ariz. 1967
- State v. Clark 434 P.2d 636 Ariz. 1967
- State v. White 425 P.2d 424 Ariz. 1967
- State v. White 425 P.2d 424 Ariz. 1967
- State v. Foggy 420 P.2d 934 Ariz. 1966
- State v. Foggy 420 P.2d 934 Ariz. 1966
- State v. Intogna 419 P.2d 59 Ariz. 1966
- Distinguished State v. Intogna 419 P.2d 59 Ariz. 1966
- State v. Chalmers 411 P.2d 448 Ariz. 1966
- State v. Douglas 407 P.2d 117 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1965
-
State v. Douglas
407 P.2d 117
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1965
State v. Mathis (supra).
- State v. Goff 407 P.2d 55 Ariz. 1965
- State v. Goff 407 P.2d 55 Ariz. 1965
- State v. Schantz 403 P.2d 521 Ariz. 1965
- State v. Wallace 403 P.2d 550 Ariz. 1965
- State v. Schantz 403 P.2d 521 Ariz. 1965
- State v. Wallace 403 P.2d 550 Ariz. 1965
- State v. Ortiz 399 P.2d 171 Ariz. 1965