Cited by

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

2476 citing documents.

State v. Hernandez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Hernandez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
This case comes to us as an appeal under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), P.2d 878 (1969).
State v. Dorsey Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Hill 336 P.3d 1283 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Hill 336 P.3d 1283 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
3 Hill's counsel filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), P.2d 878 (1969), saying she could identify no arguable question of law that was not frivolous.
State v. Dorsey Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
H O W E, Judge: ¶1 This appeal is filed in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), P.2d 878 (1969).
State v. Steinbrugger Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Steinbrugger Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Counsel for Steinbrugger filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), P.2d 878 (1969), advising that after searching the record on appeal, she was unable to find any arguable grounds for reversal.
State v. Barnes Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Barnes Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
H O W E, Judge: ¶1 This appeal is filed in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) P.2d 878 (1969).
State v. Coven Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Coven Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
G O U L D, Judge: ¶1 Daniel S. Coven (“Defendant”) appeals the trial court’s revocation of his probation.1 ¶2 Defendant’s counsel filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), P.2d 878 (1969), advising this Court that after a search of the entire appellate record, no arguable ground exists for reversal.
State v. Robinson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Robinson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
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. Ales Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Humelhans Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Estrada Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Estrada Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
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. Humelhans Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Therefore, in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), P.2d 878 (1969), defense counsel asks this Court to search the record for fundamental error.
State v. Ales Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
¶2 Defendant’s counsel filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), P.2d 878 (1969), advising this Court that after a search of the entire appellate record, no arguable ground exists for reversal.
State v. Ayala Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Davis Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Ayala Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Ayala argues his appellate counsel was ineffective for filing a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967), and advising this court there were no arguable grounds for reversal.
State v. Davis Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
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. Brown Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Yazzie Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Arnold Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Arnold Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Arnold’s counsel filed a brief in compliance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), P.2d 878 (1969), 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. Brown Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
¶2 Brown’s counsel filed a brief in compliance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), P.2d 878 (1969), 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. Yazzie Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
After searching the record on appeal and finding no arguable question of law that was not frivolous, Yazzie’s counsel filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) P.2d 878 (1969), asking this court to search the record for fundamental error.
State v. Knox Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Krentiras Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Knox Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
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. Krentiras Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
K E S S L E R, Judge: ¶1 Nicholas Krentiras filed this appeal in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), P.2d 878 (1969), following his conviction of one count of endangerment, two counts of assault, one count of criminal trespass in the third degree, and one count of disorderly conduct.
State v. Valenzuela-Valdez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Valenzuela-Valdez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Valenzuela-Valdez’s counsel filed a brief in compliance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), P.2d 878 (1969), 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. Armenta Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Johnson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Mayville Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Johnson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
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. Armenta Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Armenta’s counsel filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), P.2d 878 (1969), certifying that, after a diligent search of the record, he found no arguable question of law that was not frivolous.
State v. Mayville Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
P O R T L E Y, Judge: ¶1 Defendant Stephen Vincent Mayville has filed an appeal under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) P.2d 878 (1969).
State v. Cabrera Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Buckley Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Buckley Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
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. Cabrera Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Counsel for Cabrera filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), P.2d 878 (1969), advising that after searching the record on appeal, he was unable to find any arguable grounds for reversal.
State v. Chavez-Molina Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Lozano Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Lozano Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Lozano’s counsel filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), P.2d 878 (1969), certifying that, after a diligent search of the record, he found no arguable question of law that was not frivolous.
State v. Chavez-Molina Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
T H U M M A, Judge: ¶1 This is an appeal pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) P.2d 878 (1969), following a prior appeal where defendant Jaime Chavez-Molina’s convictions were affirmed, most of his sentences were affirmed but two sentences were vacated and remanded for resentencing.