Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Leon, 451 P.2d 878.

2476 citing documents.

State v. Saldana Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
State v. Saldana Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Saldana’s counsel filed a brief per Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), advising us there are no meritorious grounds for reversal.
State v. Laris Laris Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
State v. Nevarez-Laboy Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
State v. Laris Laris Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
State v. Nevarez-Laboy Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
B R O W N, Judge: ¶1 This appeal is presented to us pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967)
State v. Laris Laris Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Appellant’s counsel has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), stating he has searched the record on appeal and found no arguable question of law that is not frivolous.
State v. Laris Laris Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Appellant’s counsel has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), stating counsel has searched the record on appeal and found no arguable question of law.
State v. Vela Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
State v. Vela Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
His counsel filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), advising this Court that he found no arguable questions of law and asking us to search the record for fundamental error.
State v. Billingsley Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
State v. Hayes Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
State v. Lagunas Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
State v. Billingsley Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
¶2 This appeal of the restitution judgment is filed in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967)
State v. Lagunas Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
T H U M M A, Judge: ¶1 This is an appeal under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967)
State v. Hayes Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
P E R K I N S, Judge: ¶1 Eric Lee Hayes filed a timely appeal in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) following his convictions for first-degree murder, a class 1 felony; two counts of kidnapping, a class 2 felony; armed robbery, a class 2 felony; attempt to commit armed robbery, a class 3 felony; and first-degree burglary, a class 2 felony.
State v. Hughey Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
State v. Hughey Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
C R U Z, Judge: ¶1 This appeal is filed in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967)
State v. Davis Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
State v. Davis Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
T H U M M A, Judge: ¶1 This is an appeal under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967)
State v. Leyva Rabago Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
State v. Leyva Rabago Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
After reviewing the record, Rabago’s counsel filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), asking us to search the record for fundamental error.
State v. Rodvelt Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
State v. Rodvelt Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Rodvelt’s counsel filed a brief per Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) advising us there are no meritorious grounds for reversal.
State v. Zinger Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
State v. Menyongari Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
State v. Zinger Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Zinger’s counsel filed a brief per Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), certifying that she found no arguable question of law that was not frivolous after a diligent search of the record.
State v. Menyongari Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
B A I L E Y, Judge: ¶1 This is an appeal under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967)
State v. Flores Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
State v. Flores Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
After searching the record and finding no arguable, non-frivolous question of law, Flores’s counsel filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), asking this court to search the record for fundamental error.
State v. Phillips Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
State v. Menyongari Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
State v. Phillips Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
T H U M M A, Judge: ¶1 This is an appeal under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967)
State v. Menyongari Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
B A I L E Y, Judge: ¶1 This is an appeal under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967)
State v. Wheaton Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
State v. Wheaton Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Therefore, in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), defense counsel asks this Court to search the record for fundamental error.
State v. Peacey Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
State v. Peacey Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
T H U M M A, Judge: ¶1 This is an appeal under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967)
State v. Jones Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
State v. Jones Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
After searching the record and finding no arguable, non-frivolous question of law, Jones’ counsel filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), asking this Court to search the record for fundamental error.
State v. Owen Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
State v. Owen Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Owen’s counsel filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), certifying that, after a diligent search of the record, he found no arguable question of law that was not frivolous.
State v. Poteet Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
State v. Poteet Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Clark, 196 Ariz. at 537, ¶ 30.
State v. Rogers Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
State v. Rogers Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
P E R K I N S, Judge: Carl David Rogers timely filed this appeal in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) following the superior court’s restitution order.
State v. Santos Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
State v. Santos Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
After searching the record on appeal and finding no arguable question of law, Santos’ counsel filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), asking this court to search the record for reversible error.
State v. Nunez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State v. Black Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020