Cited by

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

2476 citing documents.

State v. Fullen Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
C R U Z, Judge: ¶1 This appeal was filed in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967)
State v. Beck Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
Beck’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. Olivier Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
State v. Olivier Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
C R U Z, Judge: ¶1 This appeal was filed in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967)
State v. Rivas Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
State v. Rivas Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
B A I L E Y, Judge: ¶1 This is an appeal under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967)
State v. Aguilar Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
State v. Aguilar Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
H O W E, Judge: ¶1 This appeal is filed in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967)
State v. Bermudez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
State v. Bermudez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
Bermudez’s counsel filed a brief per Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), advising us there are no meritorious grounds for reversal.
State v. Johnson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
State v. Johnson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
C R U Z, Judge: ¶1 This appeal was filed in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967)
State v. Mello Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
State v. Mello Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
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. Garland Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
State v. Gollihar Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
State v. Daniels Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
State v. Mora Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
State v. Garland Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
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. Mora Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
B R O W N, Judge: ¶1 This appeal from the superior court’s sentencing order is presented to us pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967)
State v. Gollihar Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
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. Daniels Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
We received a brief from Daniels’ counsel in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), certifying that she diligently searched the record and found no arguable, non-frivolous question of law.
State v. Johnson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
State v. Johnson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
Johnson’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. Neel Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
State v. Neel Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
F U R U Y A, Judge: ¶1 This is an appeal under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967)
State v. Massey Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Massey Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
C R U Z, Judge: ¶1 This appeal was filed in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967)
State v. Lester Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Lester Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Lester’s counsel filed a brief per 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. Neal Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Neal Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
G A S S, Vice Chief Judge: ¶1 Robert Edward Neal filed this appeal in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967)
State v. White Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. White Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
White’s counsel filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) avowing that she searched the record and found no non-frivolous issues for appeal.
State v. Vigil Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Vigil Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Vigil’s counsel filed a brief per 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.1 Vigil was allowed to file a supplemental brief, and he alleged: (1) the prosecutor engaged in misconduct through vouching and improper emotional appeal; (2) the State’s exhibits 1-10 were preju
State v. Gomez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Gomez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Gomez’s counsel filed a brief per Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) certifying that he found no arguable question of law that was not frivolous after a diligent search of the record.
State v. Farnberg Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Farnberg Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
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. Molina Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Molina Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
This is an appeal under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967)
State v. Mello Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
In Re Carson Y. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Mello Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Mello’s counsel filed a brief per Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), advising us there are no meritorious grounds for reversal.
In Re Carson Y. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Carson’s counsel filed a brief per Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), certifying that, after a diligent search of the record, counsel found no arguable question of law that was not frivolous.
State v. McClain Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. McClain Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
S W A N N, Judge: ¶1 This is an appeal under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), from Antwain Jevar McClain’s misdemeanor convictions and sentences.
State v. Quarmby Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Grigsby Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022