Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Dessureault, 453 P.2d 951.

382 citing documents.

State v. Michael Apelt 861 P.2d 634 Ariz. 1993
State v. Michael Apelt 861 P.2d 634 Ariz. 1993
State v. Atwood 832 P.2d 593 Ariz. 1992
State v. Atwood 832 P.2d 593 Ariz. 1992
In response to defendant’s motion to suppress, the trial court held an 11-day Dessureault hearing, , to determine the admissibility of the various identifications.
State v. Fierroa 804 P.2d 72 Ariz. 1990
State v. Fierroa 804 P.2d 72 Ariz. 1990
After a Dessureault hearing, , cert.
State v. Romanosky 782 P.2d 693 Ariz. 1989
State v. Romanosky 782 P.2d 693 Ariz. 1989
State v. Valles 780 P.2d 1049 Ariz. 1989
State v. Valles 780 P.2d 1049 Ariz. 1989
State v. Sherrill 781 P.2d 642 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1989
State v. Sherrill 781 P.2d 642 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1989
We do not address any issues relating to Johnson’s competency, other than in the context of Collins, , because neither the state nor Vogt have raised these issues.
State v. White 770 P.2d 328 Ariz. 1989
State v. White 770 P.2d 328 Ariz. 1989
State v. Nirschel 745 P.2d 953 Ariz. 1987
State v. Nirschel 745 P.2d 953 Ariz. 1987
State v. Cartwright 746 P.2d 478 Ariz. 1987
State v. Cartwright 746 P.2d 478 Ariz. 1987
this court set down the rules which apply in trial courts when a defendant challenges an in-court identification on the basis that it has been tainted by pre-trial identification procedures.
State v. Swoopes 747 P.2d 593 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1987
State v. Swoopes 747 P.2d 593 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1987
*434 A pretrial hearing was held on appellant’s , cert.
State v. Dogan 724 P.2d 1264 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
State v. Dogan 724 P.2d 1264 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
On defense counsel’s motion, , cert.
State v. Castaneda 724 P.2d 1 Ariz. 1986
State v. Castaneda 724 P.2d 1 Ariz. 1986
State v. Tyler 718 P.2d 214 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
State v. Tyler 718 P.2d 214 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
Pretrial Identification of the Gun Defendant claims that he was entitled to a , cert.
State v. Cannon 713 P.2d 273 Ariz. 1985
State v. Cannon 713 P.2d 273 Ariz. 1985
[Appellant’s Opening Brief at 30, 31] , and accurately states the law in Arizona.
State v. Smith 707 P.2d 289 Ariz. 1985
State v. Smith 707 P.2d 289 Ariz. 1985
State v. Alvarez 701 P.2d 1178 Ariz. 1985
State v. Alvarez 701 P.2d 1178 Ariz. 1985
IDENTIFICATION PROCEDURES Before trial, a , cert.
State v. Smith 705 P.2d 1376 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
State v. Smith 705 P.2d 1376 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
State v. Campbell 706 P.2d 741 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1985
State v. Campbell 706 P.2d 741 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1985
State v. Burton 697 P.2d 331 Ariz. 1985
State v. Burton 697 P.2d 331 Ariz. 1985
1951 , 18 L.Ed.2d 1178 (1967); , supplemented by , cert.
State v. Roberts 698 P.2d 1291 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
State v. Roberts 698 P.2d 1291 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
State v. Parris 696 P.2d 1368 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
State v. Parris 696 P.2d 1368 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
State v. Roscoe 700 P.2d 1312 Ariz. 1984
State v. Roscoe 700 P.2d 1312 Ariz. 1984
State v. Rodriquez 700 P.2d 855 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
State v. Rodriquez 700 P.2d 855 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
He argues that two of the lineup procedures were unduly suggestive and that, in any event, the trial court’s findings after hearing evidence at the Dessureault hearing on November 14, 1980 , cert.
State v. Tison 690 P.2d 755 Ariz. 1984
State v. Tison 690 P.2d 747 Ariz. 1984
State v. Tison 690 P.2d 747 Ariz. 1984
ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL Petitioner argues that his assistance of counsel at trial was ineffective because trial counsel did not request a , cert.
State v. Tison 690 P.2d 755 Ariz. 1984
ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL Petitioner argues that his assistance of counsel at trial was ineffective because trial counsel did not request a , cert.