Cited by
Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Brady, 461 P.2d 488.
- State v. Cardona Rodriguez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
- State v. Cardona Rodriguez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
- Joshua J. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 286 P.3d 166 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
-
Joshua J. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security
286 P.3d 166
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
(in a speedy trial analysis in a criminal ease, the threshold test for proving prejudice is whether there was reasonable probability that a different result might have occurred had there been no inappropriate delay).
- State v. Vasko 971 P.2d 189 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
- State v. Vasko 971 P.2d 189 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
- Creach v. Angulo 941 P.2d 224 Ariz. 1997
-
Creach v. Angulo
941 P.2d 224
Ariz. 1997
Reversible error is, “[i]n appellate practice, such an error as warrants the appellate court in reversing the judgment before it; substantial error, that which reasonably might have prejudiced the party complaining.” Black’s Law Dictionary 543 (6th ed.1990); , (“This Court has held many times that in order to justify a reversal an error must be prejudicial under the facts of the case.”).
- State v. Lacy 929 P.2d 1288 Ariz. 1996
- State v. Lacy 929 P.2d 1288 Ariz. 1996
- State v. Paredes 887 P.2d 577 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1994
-
State v. Paredes
887 P.2d 577
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1994
1199 , 117 L.Ed.2d 439 (1992) ( , ) (citations omitted).
- State v. White 815 P.2d 869 Ariz. 1991
- State v. White 815 P.2d 869 Ariz. 1991
- State v. Schossow 703 P.2d 448 Ariz. 1985
- State v. Schossow 703 P.2d 448 Ariz. 1985
- State v. Gamez 696 P.2d 1327 Ariz. 1985
- State v. Gamez 696 P.2d 1327 Ariz. 1985
- State v. Noleen 688 P.2d 993 Ariz. 1984
- State v. Noleen 688 P.2d 993 Ariz. 1984
- State v. McNair 687 P.2d 1230 Ariz. 1984
- State v. McNair 687 P.2d 1230 Ariz. 1984
- State v. Diaz 662 P.2d 461 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
-
State v. Diaz
662 P.2d 461
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
State v. Jackson, supra; , , 41 Am.Jur.2d Indictments and Informations, Sec.
- State v. Davis 672 P.2d 480 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
- State v. Davis 672 P.2d 480 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
- State v. Cousin 664 P.2d 233 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
- State v. Cousin 664 P.2d 233 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
- State v. Conn 669 P.2d 585 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1982
-
State v. Conn
669 P.2d 585
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1982
824 , 17 L.Ed.2d 705 (1967)
- State v. DeBoucher 660 P.2d 471 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1982
- State v. DeBoucher 660 P.2d 471 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1982
- State v. Williams 650 P.2d 1202 Ariz. 1982
-
State v. Williams
650 P.2d 1202
Ariz. 1982
that a verdict might have been different had the error not been committed.” , ( , ).
- State v. Conroy 642 P.2d 873 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
- State v. Conroy 642 P.2d 873 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
- State v. Yarbrough 638 P.2d 737 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1981
- State v. Yarbrough 638 P.2d 737 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1981
- State v. McVay 622 P.2d 9 Ariz. 1980
-
State v. McVay
622 P.2d 9
Ariz. 1980
The test is whether there was reasonable probability under such facts that a verdict might have been different had the error not been committed, (citations omitted) * * *”
- State v. Valencia 589 P.2d 434 Ariz. 1979
-
State v. Valencia
589 P.2d 434
Ariz. 1979
The trial court should instruct the jury on every degree or grade of offense that is supported by the evidence
- State v. Morales 587 P.2d 236 Ariz. 1978
- State v. Morales 587 P.2d 236 Ariz. 1978
- State v. LaBarre 565 P.2d 1305 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1977
- State v. LaBarre 565 P.2d 1305 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1977
- State v. Taintor 540 P.2d 751 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1975
- State v. Taintor 540 P.2d 751 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1975
- State v. Zaerr 521 P.2d 1131 Ariz. 1974
- State v. Zaerr 521 P.2d 1131 Ariz. 1974