Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Jennings, 448 P.2d 59.

53 citing documents.

State v. Wilson 851 P.2d 863 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
State v. Wilson 851 P.2d 863 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
at 1712 n. 5; , modified on other grounds
State v. Seats 638 P.2d 1348 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1981
State v. Cutler 590 P.2d 444 Ariz. 1979
State v. Cutler 590 P.2d 444 Ariz. 1979
State v. Dodd 577 P.2d 274 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1978
State v. Dodd 577 P.2d 274 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1978
our supreme court said that an involuntary plea is void.
State v. Gutierrez 512 P.2d 869 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
State v. Gutierrez 512 P.2d 869 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
1463 , 25 L.Ed.2d 747 (1970)
State v. Reynolds 497 P.2d 812 Ariz. 1972
State v. Reynolds 497 P.2d 812 Ariz. 1972
State v. Lerch 490 P.2d 1 Ariz. 1971
State v. Lerch 490 P.2d 1 Ariz. 1971
A plea which results from coercion is void, , , McCarthy v. United States, 394 U.S. 459 , 89 S.Ct.
State v. Gilbreath 487 P.2d 390 Ariz. 1971
State v. Gilbreath 487 P.2d 390 Ariz. 1971
Defendant urges that the pleas of guilty entered in the Superior Court were invalid in that the interrogation of the sentencing judge did not comply with Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, 18 U.S.C.A., , , this court intended to make Rule 11 applicable to the taking of guilty pleas in Arizona.
State v. Kendall 481 P.2d 265 Ariz. 1971
State v. Kendall 481 P.2d 265 Ariz. 1971
160 , 27 L.Ed.2d 162 ; , , , .
State v. Hogue 479 P.2d 417 Ariz. 1971
Maxwell v. State 479 P.2d 412 Ariz. 1971
Maxwell v. State 479 P.2d 412 Ariz. 1971
160 , 27 L.Ed.2d 162 ; , .
State v. Hogue 479 P.2d 417 Ariz. 1971
at 5 , at 61 (1968) this Court stated that “[i]t is well understood that any plea which is involuntary is of course void.” Therefore, a judgment based on such involuntary plea would not sustain a conviction and, on motion, would have to be vacated; for it is a trial court’s “duty to expunge from the reco
State v. Smith 478 P.2d 122 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
State v. Smith 478 P.2d 122 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
modified on other grounds and affirmed on rehearing
State v. Zarate 478 P.2d 74 Ariz. 1970
State v. Zarate 478 P.2d 74 Ariz. 1970
State v. Gardner 472 P.2d 28 Ariz. 1970
State v. Gardner 472 P.2d 28 Ariz. 1970
State v. Reynolds 470 P.2d 454 Ariz. 1970
State v. Reynolds 470 P.2d 454 Ariz. 1970
we said that when a plea is changed from *49 “not guilty” to “guilty” the trial judge must be careful to safeguard the rights of the defendant.
State v. Cordova 469 P.2d 82 Ariz. 1970
State v. Cordova 469 P.2d 82 Ariz. 1970
510 , 7 L.Ed.2d 473 (1962)
State v. Farley 468 P.2d 379 Ariz. 1970
State v. Farley 468 P.2d 379 Ariz. 1970
have therefore examined-the record as to whether, the court followed the procedure- required for the protection of a. defendant’s rights in “plea bargaining.” , ; , ; , .
State v. Carpenter 467 P.2d 749 Ariz. 1970
State v. Carpenter 467 P.2d 749 Ariz. 1970
State v. Davis 467 P.2d 743 Ariz. 1970
State v. Davis 467 P.2d 743 Ariz. 1970
State v. Hansen 464 P.2d 960 Ariz. 1970
State v. Hansen 464 P.2d 960 Ariz. 1970
The court’s interrogation, and the answers elicited from defendant, , and in our view are consistent with the standards set forth in Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238 , 89 S.Ct.
State v. Pickard 462 P.2d 87 Ariz. 1969
State v. Pickard 462 P.2d 87 Ariz. 1969
State v. Peoples 461 P.2d 81 Ariz. 1969
State v. Jelks 461 P.2d 473 Ariz. 1969
State v. Peoples 461 P.2d 81 Ariz. 1969
State v. Chambers 459 P.2d 302 Ariz. 1969
State v. Brown 451 P.2d 901 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1969
State v. Brown 451 P.2d 901 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1969
State v. Jennings, Ariz., , , 295 P. 311 (1931).
State v. Popejoy 450 P.2d 411 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
State v. Popejoy 450 P.2d 411 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
Modified on Rehearing, , (Feb.
State v. Churton 448 P.2d 888 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1968