Cited by
Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Acosta, 416 P.2d 560.
-
State v. Matus
486 P.2d 209
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
and State v. Crank, 13 Ariz.App.
- State v. Rhymes 480 P.2d 662 Ariz. 1971
- State v. Rhymes 480 P.2d 662 Ariz. 1971
- State v. Salinas 479 P.2d 411 Ariz. 1971
- State v. Salinas 479 P.2d 411 Ariz. 1971
- State v. Harvill 476 P.2d 841 Ariz. 1970
- State v. Harvill 476 P.2d 841 Ariz. 1970
- State v. Berryman 475 P.2d 472 Ariz. 1970
-
State v. Berryman
475 P.2d 472
Ariz. 1970
cited by defendant does not support this contention.
- State v. Humphrey 464 P.2d 824 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1970
- State v. Humphrey 464 P.2d 824 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1970
- State v. Vann 463 P.2d 75 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1970
- State v. Vann 463 P.2d 75 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1970
- State v. Dessureault 453 P.2d 951 Ariz. 1969
- State v. Dessureault 453 P.2d 951 Ariz. 1969
- State v. Williams 452 P.2d 112 Ariz. 1969
- State v. Williams 452 P.2d 112 Ariz. 1969
- State v. Villalobos 430 P.2d 723 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1967
-
State v. Villalobos
430 P.2d 723
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1967
§ 13-163 , , it has always been error to comment upon the failure of the defendant to testify at the trial of a matter.