DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

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. Delgado Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
  • State v. Yancy Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
  • State v. Delgado 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. Yancy Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
    ¶2 After searching the record on appeal and finding no arguable question of law that was not frivolous, Yancy’s defense 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. Zotigh Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
  • State v. Mooradian Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
  • State v. Zotigh 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. Mooradian Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
    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. Jackson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
  • State v. Duran Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
  • State v. Jackson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
    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 he has searched the record on appeal and found no arguable question of law that is not frivolous.
  • State v. Duran 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, he found no arguable question of law that was not frivolous.
  • State v. Torres Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
  • State v. Maldonado Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
  • State v. Brain Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
  • State v. Maldonado Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
    K E S S L E R, Judge: ¶1 Rogelio Maldonado filed this appeal in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), P.2d 878 (1969), following his illegal re-entry into the United States under 8 U.S.C.
  • State v. Brain Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
    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, he found no arguable question of law that was not frivolous.
  • State v. Torres Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
    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. Powels Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
  • State v. Hanley Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
  • State v. Hanley 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. Powels Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
    J O H N S E N, Judge: ¶1 This appeal was timely filed in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), P.2d 878 (1969), following Douglas Anthony Powels's conviction of criminal trespass, a Class 6 felony.
  • State v. Hernandez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
  • State v. Alcantar Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
  • State v. Hernandez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
    STATE v. HERNANDEZ Decision of the Court 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. Alcantar Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
    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. Buechler Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
  • State v. Smith Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
  • State v. Buechler Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
    In accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), P.2d 878 (1969), defense counsel requests this Court search the record for fundamental error.
  • State v. Smith Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
    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. Lass Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
  • State v. Lass Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
    Lass’ 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. Campos Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
  • State v. Campos Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
    Campos’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, she found no arguable question of law that was not frivolous.
  • State v. Loff Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
  • State v. Sandoval Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
  • State v. Knight Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
  • State v. Smith Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
  • State v. Knight 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. Loff Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
    After searching the record on appeal and finding no arguable question of law that was not frivolous, Loff’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. Smith 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. Sandoval Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
    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. Abdullah Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
  • State v. Spinelli Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
  • State v. Abdullah Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
    Abdullah’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. Spinelli Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
    After searching the record on appeal and finding no arguable question of law that was not frivolous, Spinelli’s defense 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. Guarino Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
  • State v. Guarino Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
    J O H N S E N, Judge: ¶1 This appeal was timely filed in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), P.2d 878 (1969), following David Paul Guarino's conviction of theft, a Class 3 felony.
  • State v. Mekhail Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
  • State v. Mekhail Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
    Mekhail’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.