Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Schroeder, 389 P.2d 255.

101 citing documents.

State v. Schmid 509 P.2d 619 Ariz. 1973
784 , 17 L.Ed.2d 687 (1967); , , cert.
State v. Brierly 509 P.2d 203 Ariz. 1973
State v. Brierly 509 P.2d 203 Ariz. 1973
Brierly next contends that the instruction containing the following sentence violates the presumption of innocence due every defendant: “If the use of such dangerous weapon does in fact cause great bodily harm or death, it is presumed that such harm or death was intended by the assailant.” This sentence correctly states the law, , and its inclusion in instruction No. 7 was therefore proper.
State v. Jones 505 P.2d 251 Ariz. 1973
State v. Jones 505 P.2d 251 Ariz. 1973
State v. Miller 501 P.2d 383 Ariz. 1972
State v. Miller 501 P.2d 383 Ariz. 1972
“ * * * instructions on lesser offenses are justified only when there is evidence upon which the jury could convict of a lesser offense and, at the same time, find that the state had failed to prove an element of the greater crime, (citations omitted) In other words, the state of the record must not be such that defendant can only be guilty of the crime charged or not at all.” , cert.
State v. Ramos 492 P.2d 697 Ariz. 1972
State v. Ramos 492 P.2d 697 Ariz. 1972
State v. Altman 482 P.2d 460 Ariz. 1971
State v. Altman 482 P.2d 460 Ariz. 1971
we said: “Under our holdings, instructions on lesser offenses are justified only when there is evidence upon which the jury could convict of a lesser offense and, at the same time, find that the state had failed to prove an element of the greater crime.
State v. Contreras 481 P.2d 861 Ariz. 1971
State v. Mancini 481 P.2d 864 Ariz. 1971
State v. Contreras 481 P.2d 861 Ariz. 1971
Conversely, , , , , , 17 A.R.S.
State v. Mancini 481 P.2d 864 Ariz. 1971
State v. Hatten 474 P.2d 830 Ariz. 1970
State v. Hatten 474 P.2d 830 Ariz. 1970
* * * In other words, the state of the record must not be such that defendant can only be guilty of the crime charged or not at all.”
State ex rel. Murphy v. Superior Court 470 P.2d 486 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1970
State ex rel. Murphy v. Superior Court 470 P.2d 486 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1970
State v. Malumphy 461 P.2d 677 Ariz. 1969
State v. Malumphy 461 P.2d 677 Ariz. 1969
State v. Brady 461 P.2d 488 Ariz. 1969
State v. Brady 461 P.2d 488 Ariz. 1969
State v. Lombardo 457 P.2d 275 Ariz. 1969
State v. Lombardo 457 P.2d 275 Ariz. 1969
State v. Sorensen 455 P.2d 981 Ariz. 1969
State v. Sorensen 455 P.2d 981 Ariz. 1969
State v. Boag 453 P.2d 508 Ariz. 1969
State v. Boag 453 P.2d 508 Ariz. 1969
People v. Finch, 213 Cal.App.2d 752 , 29 Cal.Rptr.
State v. Scott 452 P.2d 699 Ariz. 1969
State v. Scott 452 P.2d 699 Ariz. 1969
State v. Sutton 452 P.2d 110 Ariz. 1969
State v. Sutton 452 P.2d 110 Ariz. 1969
we upheld the failure of the Court to instruct on lesser included offenses, stating: “Under our holdings, instructions on lesser offenses are justified only when there is evidence upon which the jury could convict of a lesser offense and, at the same time, find that the state had failed to prove
State v. Leon 451 P.2d 878 Ariz. 1969
State v. Leon 451 P.2d 878 Ariz. 1969
* * * * * * * * * the state of the record must not be such that defendant can only be guilty of the crime charged or not guilty at all.”
State v. Anthony 449 P.2d 598 Ariz. 1969
State v. Anthony 449 P.2d 598 Ariz. 1969
State v. Madden 449 P.2d 39 Ariz. 1969
State v. Madden 449 P.2d 39 Ariz. 1969
3 , ; People v. Finch, 213 Cal.App.2d 752 , 29 Cal.Rptr.
State v. Marlin 428 P.2d 699 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1967
State v. Marlin 428 P.2d 699 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1967
certiorari denied 379 U.S. 939 , 85 S.Ct.
State v. Hudgens 423 P.2d 90 Ariz. 1967
State v. Hudgens 423 P.2d 90 Ariz. 1967
conviction reversed and remanded on other grounds, , .
State ex rel. Corbin v. Superior Court 414 P.2d 746 Ariz. 1966
State ex rel. Corbin v. Superior Court 414 P.2d 746 Ariz. 1966
State v. Schroeder 409 P.2d 725 Ariz. 1966
State v. Schroeder 409 P.2d 725 Ariz. 1966
On February 13, 1964, , .
State v. Monks 405 P.2d 456 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1965
State v. Monks 405 P.2d 456 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1965
Our Supreme Court considered the question of when instructions on lesser offenses become necessary: “Under our holdings, instructions on lesser offenses are justified only when there is evidence upon which the jury could convict of a lesser offense and, at the same time, find that the state had failed to prove an element of the greater crime.”
Application of Acosta 400 P.2d 328 Ariz. 1965