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. Simoneau, 401 P.2d 404.

62 citing documents.

  • State v. Mileham 415 P.2d 104 Ariz. 1966
  • State v. Mileham 415 P.2d 104 Ariz. 1966
  • State v. Tannahill 411 P.2d 166 Ariz. 1966
  • State v. Tannahill 411 P.2d 166 Ariz. 1966
    Appellant urges this cause should be remanded to the trial court for a new trial while the state would have us remand the case for a , .
  • State v. Goff 407 P.2d 55 Ariz. 1965
  • State v. Goff 407 P.2d 55 Ariz. 1965
    There was, accordingly, no possible issue for the trial judge to determine, , and no factual question for the jury to decide except as to whether the statements attributed to the defendant were or were not made.
  • State v. Griffin 406 P.2d 397 Ariz. 1965
  • State v. Griffin 406 P.2d 397 Ariz. 1965
  • State v. Shepard 405 P.2d 895 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1965
  • State v. Shepard 405 P.2d 895 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1965
  • State v. Tannahill 402 P.2d 29 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1965
  • State v. Tannahill 402 P.2d 29 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1965
    However, , , decided May 6, *283 1965, the Court, per Vice Chief Justice Struckmeyer, holds that the question of voluntariness could go back for a hearing following the dicta in Jackson v. Denno, supra, rather than for a new trial as in State v. Owen, supra, and the other cases cited above.