Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Linsner, 467 P.2d 238.

42 citing documents.

  • State v. Petkovic Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
  • State v. Petkovic Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
    (“A defendant must enter a guilty plea freely and voluntarily with understanding of the nature and consequences of the plea.”); Cf. Moran v. Burbine, 475 U.S. 412, 421 (1986) (“[W]aiver must have been made with a full awareness of both the nature of the right being abandoned and the consequences of the dec
  • State v. Mitcham 535 P.3d 948 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
  • State v. Mitcham 535 P.3d 948 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
    In any event, a “plea is itself a conviction and like a jury verdict is conclusive.”
  • State v. Blunt Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
  • State v. Blunt Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
    This court’s “power to revise and reduce sentences imposed by the trial court should be used with great caution and exercised only when it clearly appears that a sentence is too severe.”
  • State v. Christensen Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
  • State v. Christensen Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
    (“[T]he power to revise and reduce sentences imposed by the trial court should be used with great caution and exercised only when it clearly appears that a sentence is too severe.”).
  • State v. Estrada Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
  • State v. Estrada Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
    (“[T]he power to revise and reduce sentences imposed by the trial court should be used with 4 STATE v. ESTRADA Decision of the Court great caution and exercised only when it clearly appears that a sentence is t
  • State v. Harm 340 P.3d 1110 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
  • State v. Harm 340 P.3d 1110 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
    (“[A] jury verdict is conclusive.”) (citing Machibroda v. United States, 368 U.S. 487, 493 (1962)).
  • In Re Lockwood 804 P.2d 738 Ariz. 1990
  • In Re Lockwood 804 P.2d 738 Ariz. 1990
    1709 , 23 L.Ed.2d 274 (1969)
  • State v. Watton 793 P.2d 80 Ariz. 1990
  • State v. Watton 793 P.2d 80 Ariz. 1990
  • State v. Bernecker 791 P.2d 1083 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
  • State v. Bernecker 791 P.2d 1083 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
  • State v. Lukens 729 P.2d 306 Ariz. 1986
  • State v. Lukens 729 P.2d 306 Ariz. 1986
    1709 , 23 L.Ed.2d 274 (1969)
  • State v. Gannon 638 P.2d 206 Ariz. 1981
  • State v. Gannon 638 P.2d 206 Ariz. 1981
  • State v. Cutler 590 P.2d 444 Ariz. 1979
  • State v. Cutler 590 P.2d 444 Ariz. 1979
  • State v. Ferguson 547 P.2d 1085 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1976
  • State v. Ferguson 547 P.2d 1085 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1976
  • State v. Carr 527 P.2d 1250 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1974
  • State v. Carr 527 P.2d 1250 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1974
    1709 , 23 L.Ed.2d 274 (1969)
  • State v. Fischer 498 P.2d 147 Ariz. 1972
  • State v. Fischer 498 P.2d 147 Ariz. 1972
  • State v. Ritchey 490 P.2d 558 Ariz. 1971
  • State v. Ritchey 490 P.2d 558 Ariz. 1971
  • State v. Lerch 490 P.2d 1 Ariz. 1971
  • State v. Lerch 490 P.2d 1 Ariz. 1971
    It is well-established that a defendant must enter a plea freely and voluntarily with an understanding of- the nature and consequences of his plea, , and such plea must not be induced by promises or threats for this would deprive it of the character of a voluntary act.
  • State v. Garcia 483 P.2d 55 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
  • State v. Garcia 483 P.2d 55 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
    North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25 , 91 S.Ct.
  • State v. Leuck 481 P.2d 842 Ariz. 1971
  • State v. Leuck 481 P.2d 842 Ariz. 1971
    Kercheval v. United States, 274 U.S. 220 , 47 S.Ct.
  • State v. Leuck 475 P.2d 745 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
  • State v. Leuck 475 P.2d 745 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1971
    Cortez v. United States, 337 F.2d 699 (9th Cir. 1964)
  • State v. Bridges 468 P.2d 604 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
  • State v. Bridges 468 P.2d 604 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
    decided 2 April 1970, citing Griswold.