Cited by

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

2476 citing documents.

State v. Tracey Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Smith Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Smith Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Therefore, in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), defense counsel asked this Court to search the record for fundamental error.
State v. Tracey Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
C A T T A N I, Judge: ¶1 Steven Eugene Tracey appeals the superior court’s restitution order—stemming from a conviction for sexual conduct with a minor— requiring Tracey to pay $6,500 to the Yavapai County Victim Compensation Board.1 Tracey’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. Aulbach Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Dominguez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Johnson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Johnson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
S W A N N, Judge: ¶1 This is an appeal under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), from Charles Raymond Johnson’s conviction for possession or use of marijuana and possession of drug paraphernalia.
State v. Dominguez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Dominguez’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. Aulbach Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Counsel for Aulbach filed a brief in compliance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), advising that after searching the record on appeal, he found no meritorious grounds for reversal.
State v. Maestas Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Maestas Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
J O H N S E N, Judge: ¶1 Frank Carbajal Maestas timely filed this appeal in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), following his conviction of misconduct involving weapons (possession of a deadly weapon by a prohibited possessor), a Class 4 felony.
State v. Diamond Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Hamer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Calderon-Torres Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Hamer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
This appeal is filed in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967)
Calderon-Torres Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Therefore, in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), defense counsel asked this Court to search the record for fundamental error.
State v. Diamond Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
C R U Z, Judge: ¶1 This appeal is filed in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967)
State v. Soto Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Soto Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Therefore, in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Soto’s counsel asked this Court to search the record for fundamental error.
State v. Ezesarte Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Young Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Compton Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Young Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
B E E N E, Judge: ¶1 This appeal was timely filed in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) following Jonathan Lawrence Young’s (“Young”) convictions for aggravated DUI for driving while his license was suspended or revoked, and aggravated DUI for having a blood alcohol content of .08 or greater, both class 4 felonies.
State v. Compton Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
T H O M P S O N, Presiding Judge: ¶1 This case comes to us as an appeal under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), P.2d 878 (1969).
State v. Ezesarte Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Ezesarte’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. Wooten Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Norris Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Norris Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Norris’s counsel filed a brief in compliance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), advising that after searching the record on appeal, he found no meritorious grounds for reversal.
State v. Wooten Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Wooten’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. Goddard Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
In Re Leonaunce T. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Goddard Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Appellant’s counsel has filed a brief in accordance with Smith v. Robbins, 528 U.S. 259 (2000); Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); stating she has searched the record on appeal and has found no arguable question of law that is not frivolous.
In Re Leonaunce T. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Appellant’s counsel has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); and Maricopa Cty.
State v. Young Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Hart Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Young Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
S W A N N, Judge: ¶1 This is an appeal under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), from Andrew Michael Young’s conviction for assault and the court’s imposition of probation.
State v. Hart Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
After searching the record on appeal and finding no arguable question of law that was not frivolous, Hart’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. Madrid Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Blake Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Akuar Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Akuar Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
T H O M P S O N, Presiding Judge: ¶1 This case comes to us as an appeal under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), P.2d 878 (1969).
State v. Blake Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
J O H N S E N, Judge: ¶1 Michael Alex Blake timely filed this appeal in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), following his convictions of aggravated assault, a Class 4 felony, and resisting arrest, a Class 1 misdemeanor.
State v. Madrid Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
B E E N E, Judge: ¶1 This appeal was timely filed in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) following Chase Aaron Madrid’s (“Madrid”) convictions for possession of dangerous drugs and possession of drug paraphernalia.
State v. Ahmed Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Ahmed Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
C R U Z, Judge: ¶1 This appeal is filed in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967)
State v. Perkins Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Muniz-Munguia Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Kluver Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Muniz-Munguia Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
H O W E, Judge: ¶1 This appeal is filed in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967)