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. Adams, 400 P.2d 360.

31 citing documents.

  • State of Arizona v. Randall Shannon Gray 295 P.3d 951 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2013
  • State of Arizona v. Randall Shannon Gray 295 P.3d 951 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2013
    But, admissions made by counsel in opening statements are generally binding on a party, may be considered by the jury, and obviate “the necessity of fuller proof.” -31, 180 P. 526, 527 (1919); accord State v. Adams, 1 Ariz. App. 153, 156, cf. United States v. Bentson, 947 F.2d 1353, 1356 (9th Cir. 1991) (defendant bound by defense counsel’s admission in closing argument that defendant failed to file valid income tax returns).
  • State v. Jones 4 P.3d 345 Ariz. 2000
  • State v. Jones 4 P.3d 345 Ariz. 2000
  • Bogue v. Better-Bilt Aluminum Co. 875 P.2d 1327 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
  • Bogue v. Better-Bilt Aluminum Co. 875 P.2d 1327 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
    made during the existence of the relationship— -11 , -64 (App. 1989) (opening statement of plaintiffs attorney in prior lawsuit was admission made by plaintiffs agent within the scope of agency and thus admissible in later lawsuit); -56 , -64 (1965) (lawyer’s admissions during trial may generally be used against client).
  • Copeland v. City of Yuma 772 P.2d 1160 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
  • Copeland v. City of Yuma 772 P.2d 1160 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
  • State v. Goldston 652 P.2d 1043 Ariz. 1982
  • State v. Goldston 652 P.2d 1043 Ariz. 1982
    72 , , there is no indication that the jury was confused or misled by the prosecutor’s statements.
  • State v. Agnew 647 P.2d 1165 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1982
  • State v. Agnew 647 P.2d 1165 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1982
  • State v. Sullivan 635 P.2d 501 Ariz. 1981
  • State v. Sullivan 635 P.2d 501 Ariz. 1981
    628 , 15 L.Ed.2d 530 (1966)
  • State v. Mincey 636 P.2d 637 Ariz. 1981
  • State v. Mincey 636 P.2d 637 Ariz. 1981
    Furthermore, the Court of Appeals has stated that “[t]he jury has the right to consider counsel’s opening statement.”
  • State v. Childs 553 P.2d 1192 Ariz. 1976
  • State v. Childs 553 P.2d 1192 Ariz. 1976
  • State v. Reim 549 P.2d 1046 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
  • State v. Reim 549 P.2d 1046 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
  • State v. Tucker 548 P.2d 1188 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1976
  • State v. Tucker 548 P.2d 1188 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1976
  • State v. Travis 545 P.2d 986 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1976
  • State v. Travis 545 P.2d 986 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1976
  • State v. Scott 537 P.2d 40 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1975
  • State v. Scott 537 P.2d 40 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1975
    We will not usually review the exercise of the trial court’s discretion in such cases unless there is “invective so palpably improper that it is clearly injurious.”
  • State v. Shing 509 P.2d 698 Ariz. 1973
  • State v. Arriola 409 P.2d 37 Ariz. 1965
  • State v. Arriola 409 P.2d 37 Ariz. 1965
  • State v. Birchfield 404 P.2d 97 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1965
  • State v. Birchfield 404 P.2d 97 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1965
    State v. Dowthard (1962), , ; State v. Adams (1965), , .