Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Valencia, 370 P.3d 124.

28 citing documents.

State v. Healer 440 P.3d 404 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2019
State v. Healer 440 P.3d 404 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2019
On review, we consolidated his case with that of Gregory Valencia Jr. State v. Valencia
State v. Cabanas Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Cabanas Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
¶6 Following the filing of Cabanas’s petition for review
State of Arizona v. valencia/healer 386 P.3d 392 Ariz. 2016
State of Arizona v. valencia/healer 386 P.3d 392 Ariz. 2016
256 ¶ 1, 257 ¶ 7, 126 (App. 2016).
State v. Laird Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Laird Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Montgomery v. Louisiana, ___ U.S. ___, 136 S. Ct. 718, 736 (2016); ¶ 17
State v. Endreson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Endreson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Montgomery v. Louisiana, __ U.S. __, 136 S. Ct. 718, 736 (2016); ¶ 17 (App. 2016).
State v. Nouan Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Nouan Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Montgomery v. Louisiana, __ U.S. __, 136 S. Ct. 718, 736 (2016); ¶ 17
State v. Pieck Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Pieck Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
718, 732 (2016); ¶ 17 (App. 2016).
State v. Hooks Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Hooks Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Montgomery v. Louisiana, 136 S. Ct. 718, 734 (2016); ¶ 17 (App. 2016).
State v. Marshall Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Marshall Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Montgomery v. Louisiana, 136 S. Ct. 718, 734 (2016); ¶ 17 (App. 2016).
State v. Bautista Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Bautista Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Montgomery v. Louisiana, __ U.S. __, 136 S. Ct. 718, 736, 193 L. Ed. 2d 599 (2016); ¶ 17
State v. Coleman Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Coleman Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Montgomery v. Louisiana, 136 S. Ct. 718, 736 (2016); ¶ 17 (App. 2016).
State v. Lee Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Lee Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Beltran Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Beltran Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
See also State v. Valencia, ___ Ariz. ___, ___, ¶ 17, (concluding Montgomery “constitutes a significant change in Arizona law that is retroactively applicable”).
State v. Stewart 377 P.3d 383 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
State v. Stewart 377 P.3d 383 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
718, 734 , 193 L.Ed.2d 599 (2016); , (concluding Montgomery “constitutes a significant change in Arizona law that is retroactively applicable”).