Cited by

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

2476 citing documents.

State v. Newell Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Newell Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
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. Rachal Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Steed Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Begay Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Steed Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Appellant’s counsel has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), stating she has searched the record on appeal and found no arguable question of law that is not frivolous.
State v. Rachal Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
After searching the record on appeal and finding no arguable question of law that was not frivolous, Rachal’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. Begay Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
After searching the record on appeal, Begay’s counsel found no arguable question of law that is not frivolous and filed his brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967)
State v. Rivera Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Rivera Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
After searching the record on appeal and finding no arguable question of law that was not frivolous, Rivera’s 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. Villa Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Villa Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Villa’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, she found no arguable question of law that was not frivolous.
State v. Saulsberry Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Saulsberry Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
P E R K I N S, Judge: ¶1 Sandy Perranoski Saulsberry timely filed this appeal in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) following his conviction for misconduct involving weapons, a class 4 felony.
State v. Rockward Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Boldan Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Boldan Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
J O H N S E N, Judge: ¶1 Rory Ray Boldan timely filed this appeal in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), following his convictions of possession of dangerous drugs, a Class 4 felony; possession of drug paraphernalia, a Class 6 felony; providing false information to a law enforcement officer, a Class 1 misdemeanor; and driving with a suspended driver's license, a Class 1 misdemeanor.
State v. Rockward Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
After searching the record and finding no arguable, non- frivolous question of law, Rockward’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. Harvey Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Harvey Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Reed Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Harvey Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
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. Reed Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
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. Harvey Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
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. Collier Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Bryant Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Collier Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Collier’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. Bryant Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Bryant’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, she found no arguable question of law that was not frivolous.
State v. Padilla Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Sain Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Sain Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
After searching the record and finding no arguable, non-frivolous question of law, Sain’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. Padilla Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
P E R K I N S, Judge: ¶1 Lisa Maria Padilla timely filed this appeal in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), following her convictions of sale or transportation of a dangerous drug, a Class 2 felony; sale or transportation of marijuana, a Class 3 felony; and two counts of possession of drug paraphernalia, each a Class 6 felony.
State v. Burney Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Burney Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
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. Murphy Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Murphy Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Murphy’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. Pintarich Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Taylor Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Taylor Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
This appeal is filed in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967)
State v. Pintarich Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
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. Johnson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Morris Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Carter Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Johnson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
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. Carter Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
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. Morris Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
After searching the record and finding no arguable, non-frivolous question of law, Morris’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. Rodgers Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Rodgers Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
P E R K I N S, Judge: ¶1 John Henry Rodgers III timely filed this appeal in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) following his conviction for one count of misconduct involving weapons, a class 4 felony.
State v. Heydorn Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Martinez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019