DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

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

2476 citing documents.

  • State v. Brechler Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
  • State v. Hassan Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
  • State v. Hassan Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
    Hassan’s counsel filed a brief in compliance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), stating that he has searched the record and found no arguable question of law and requesting that this court examine the record for reversible error.
  • State v. Brechler Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
    T H O M P S O N, 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. Olsen Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
  • State v. Smith Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
  • State v. Cordova Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
  • State v. Crush Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
  • State v. Crush Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
    Defendant’s counsel filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), advising this Court that after a search of the entire appellate record, no arguable ground exists for reversal.
  • State v. Olsen Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
    Olsen’s counsel filed a brief in compliance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), stating that she has searched the record and found no arguable question of law and requesting that this court examine the record for reversible error.
  • State v. Smith Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
    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); P.2d 878 (1969), stating that she has reviewed the record and found no potential issues to raise on direct appeal.
  • State v. Cordova Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
    Defendant’s counsel filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), advising this Court that after a search of the entire appellate record, no arguable ground exists for reversal.
  • State v. McPherson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
  • State v. Leker Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
  • State v. Misko Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
  • State v. Sanchez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
  • State v. McPherson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
    P O R T L E Y, Judge: ¶1 This is an appeal under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) P.2d 878 (1969).
  • State v. Leker Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
    P O R T L E Y, Judge: ¶1 This is an appeal under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) P.2d 878 (1969).
  • State v. Sanchez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
    Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), P.2d 878 (1969), defense counsel has searched the record, found no arguable question of law, and asked that we review the record for reversible error.
  • State v. Misko Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
    After searching the record on appeal and finding no arguable question of law that was not frivolous, Misko’s counsel filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967), P.2d 878 (1969), asking this court to search the record for fundamental error.
  • State v. Hulsey Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
  • State v. Hulsey Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
    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. Wilenchik Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
  • State v. Wilenchik Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
    T H U M M A, Judge: This is an appeal under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) P.2d 878 (1969).
  • State v. Estrada Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
  • State v. Sanora Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
  • State v. Purkey Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
  • State v. Sanora Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
    Defendant’s counsel filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), advising this Court that after a search of the entire appellate record, no arguable ground exists for reversal.
  • State v. Estrada Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
    Estrada’s counsel filed a brief in compliance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), stating that she has searched the record and found no arguable question of law and requesting that this court examine the record for reversible error.
  • State v. Purkey Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
    isconduct involving weapons, a class 4 felony, in violation of Arizona Revised Statutes (“A.R.S.”) sections 13-3102(A)(3), -3101(A)(8)(v) (Supp. 2014).1 After searching the record on appeal and finding no arguable question of law that was not frivolous, Purkey’s counsel filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967), P.2d 878 (1969), asking this court to search the record for fundamental error.
  • State v. Rivera Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
  • State v. Thomas Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
  • State v. Church Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
  • State v. Thomas Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
    T H U M M A, Judge: ¶1 This is an appeal under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) P.2d 878 (1969).
  • State v. Church Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
    P O R T L E Y, Judge: ¶1 This is an appeal under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) P.2d 878 (1969).
  • State v. Rivera Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
    Rivera’s counsel filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) advising that after searching the entire appellate record, no arguable question of law was found.
  • State v. Miranda Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
  • State v. Swier Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
  • State v. Clitso Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
  • State v. Clitso Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
    P O R T L E Y, Judge: ¶1 This is an appeal under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) P.2d 878 (1969).
  • State v. Miranda Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
    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. Swier Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
    P O R T L E Y, Judge: ¶1 This is an appeal under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) P.2d 878 (1969).
  • State v. McLendon Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
  • State v. McLendon Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
    McLendon’s counsel filed a brief in compliance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), stating that she has searched the record and found no arguable question of law and requesting that this court examine the record for reversible error.
  • State v. Alvarado Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
  • State v. Alaniz-Silva Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
  • State v. Flores Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
  • State v. Alaniz-Silva Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
    After searching the record on appeal and finding no arguable question of law that was not frivolous, Alaniz-Silva’s counsel filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967), P.2d 878 (1969), asking this court to search the record for fundamental error.
  • State v. Flores Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
    center000 H O W E, Judge: This appeal is filed in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) P.2d 878 (1969).
  • State v. Alvarado Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
    Defendant’s counsel filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), advising this Court that after a search of the entire appellate record, no arguable ground exists for reversal.