Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Sorensen, 455 P.2d 981.

46 citing documents.

State v. Jones Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Jones Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Cook 821 P.2d 731 Ariz. 1991
State v. Cook 821 P.2d 731 Ariz. 1991
( , ) (emphasis in original); see also Schmuck v. United States, 489 U.S. 705 , 716 n. 8, 109 S.Ct.
State v. Walton 769 P.2d 1017 Ariz. 1989
Followed State v. Walton 769 P.2d 1017 Ariz. 1989
State v. Clabourne 690 P.2d 54 Ariz. 1984
State v. Clabourne 690 P.2d 54 Ariz. 1984
“The presence of such evidence is the determinative factor.” , see.
State v. Tison 633 P.2d 355 Ariz. 1981
State v. Tison 633 P.2d 355 Ariz. 1981
State v. Moreno 625 P.2d 320 Ariz. 1981
State v. Moreno 625 P.2d 320 Ariz. 1981
State v. Figueroa 593 P.2d 940 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1979
State v. Figueroa 593 P.2d 940 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1979
§ 13-131 that “[i]n every crime or public offense there must exist a union or joint operation of act and intent, or criminal negligence.” The court’s
State v. Puryear 590 P.2d 475 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1979
State v. Puryear 590 P.2d 475 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1979
Nor does an examination of the cases in California, from which our involuntary manslaughter statute was derived, , reveal that the distinction is made in that jurisdiction.
State v. Valencia 589 P.2d 434 Ariz. 1979
State v. Valencia 589 P.2d 434 Ariz. 1979
The trial court should instruct the jury on every degree or grade of offense that is supported by the evidence
State v. Stambaugh 589 P.2d 469 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1978
State v. Stambaugh 589 P.2d 469 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1978
State v. Powers 571 P.2d 1016 Ariz. 1977
State v. Powers 571 P.2d 1016 Ariz. 1977
State v. Cookus 563 P.2d 898 Ariz. 1977
State v. Cookus 563 P.2d 898 Ariz. 1977
in addressing this precise issue, we said: “For the court to have properly instructed on second degree murder, the evidence reasonably construed, should tend to show a lack of premeditation and deliberation.
State v. Wilson 553 P.2d 235 Ariz. 1976
State v. Wilson 553 P.2d 235 Ariz. 1976
State v. DeGraw 550 P.2d 641 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
State v. DeGraw 550 P.2d 641 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
Involuntary, in the commission of an unlawful act not amounting to a felony, or in the commission of a lawful act which might produce death in an unlawful manner, or without due caution and circumspection.” , our Supreme Court adopted the principles stated in People v. Penny, 44 Cal.2d 861 , as the standard to be applied in determining whether a homicide had been committed “without due caution and circumspection”: “ ‘ .
State v. Clayton 514 P.2d 720 Ariz. 1973
State v. Clayton 514 P.2d 720 Ariz. 1973
The trial court should instruct the jury on every degree or grade of the offense which is supported by the evidence, , , and there is a duty to instruct the jury on inferior degrees of homicide suggested by the evidence even though no request has been made.
State v. Brierly 509 P.2d 203 Ariz. 1973
State v. Brierly 509 P.2d 203 Ariz. 1973
State v. Ballinger 504 P.2d 955 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
State v. Jones 505 P.2d 251 Ariz. 1973
State v. Ballinger 504 P.2d 955 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
The trial court has the “duty to instruct the jury on every grade of offense reasonably supported by the evidence and conversely, to refuse to instruct as to the other grades of the offense not reasonably supported by the evidence.”
State v. Jones 505 P.2d 251 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. Mojarro Padilla 483 P.2d 549 Ariz. 1971
State v. Gregge 475 P.2d 277 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
Overruled State v. Gregge 475 P.2d 277 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
As to the comment on character witnesses, in the State’s rebuttal argument
State v. Bernal 475 P.2d 6 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1970
State v. Bernal 475 P.2d 6 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1970
State v. Brady 461 P.2d 488 Ariz. 1969
State v. Brady 461 P.2d 488 Ariz. 1969
[Cases cited.]” See also: , ; , .