Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Shaw, 471 P.2d 715.

34 citing documents.

State v. Santeyan 664 P.2d 652 Ariz. 1983
State v. Santeyan 664 P.2d 652 Ariz. 1983
State v. Bouwman 328 N.W.2d 703 Minn. 1982
State v. Steelman 585 P.2d 1213 Ariz. 1978
State v. Steelman 585 P.2d 1213 Ariz. 1978
State v. Rose 535 P.2d 617 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1975
State v. Rose 535 P.2d 617 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1975
Because of the doubt cast upon these statues, § 13-1621 and § 13 — 1621.-01 A.R.S., by this decision and prior decision of this court, , , State ex rel.
State v. Gonzales 523 P.2d 66 Ariz. 1974
State v. Gonzales 523 P.2d 66 Ariz. 1974
State v. White 520 P.2d 1132 Ariz. 1974
State v. Attebery 519 P.2d 53 Ariz. 1974
State v. Attebery 519 P.2d 53 Ariz. 1974
State v. Clemons 515 P.2d 324 Ariz. 1973
State v. Clemons 515 P.2d 324 Ariz. 1973
State v. Small 514 P.2d 283 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
State v. Small 514 P.2d 283 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
Any other holding would permit the privilege accorded the patient to be taken from him by trick or fraud.”
State v. Clemons 509 P.2d 715 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
State v. Clemons 509 P.2d 715 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
our Supreme Court held unconstitutional the bifurcated trial feature of these two sections insofar as the bifurcation appeared to deprive the defendant, in the trial of the issue of guilt or innocence, of the privilege of establishing his defense of insanity as of the date of the offense.
State v. Howes 508 P.2d 331 Ariz. 1973
State v. Howes 508 P.2d 331 Ariz. 1973
State v. Hostler 507 P.2d 974 Ariz. 1973
State v. Hostler 507 P.2d 974 Ariz. 1973
State v. Parker 505 P.2d 1095 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
State v. Parker 505 P.2d 1095 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
struck down the bifurcated trial, the balance of § 13-1621.-01 was held valid.
State v. Corley 495 P.2d 470 Ariz. 1972
State v. Corley 495 P.2d 470 Ariz. 1972
A second trial was had subsequent to this Court’s , cert.
State v. Burkheart 478 P.2d 515 Ariz. 1970
State v. Burkheart 478 P.2d 515 Ariz. 1970
After his brief was filed in the Court, , in which we invalidated the bifurcated trial provided for in A.R.S.
State v. Shannon 478 P.2d 71 Ariz. 1970
State v. Shannon 478 P.2d 71 Ariz. 1970
in which we held the bifurcated trial provisions of A.R.S.
State v. Andrews 476 P.2d 673 Ariz. 1970
State v. Andrews 476 P.2d 673 Ariz. 1970
Counsel for defendants also filed a , , holding that A.R.S.
State Ex Rel. Berger v. SUPERIOR COURT, IN AND FOR COUNTY OF MARICOPA 476 P.2d 666 Ariz. 1970
State Ex Rel. Berger v. SUPERIOR COURT, IN AND FOR COUNTY OF MARICOPA 476 P.2d 666 Ariz. 1970
§ 13-1621, et seq.” However on June 18, 1970, , , that the provisions of A.R.S.