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. Wheeler, 498 P.2d 205.

29 citing documents.

  • State v. Gonzales Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
  • State v. Gonzales Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
    (holding the court placed the defendant in double jeopardy by attempting to increase a lawful, previously pronounced sentence after the defendant 6 STATE v. GONZALES Decision of the Court hit his attorney in
  • State v. Suniga 701 P.2d 1197 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
  • State v. Suniga 701 P.2d 1197 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
  • State v. Thomas 688 P.2d 1093 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
  • State v. Thomas 688 P.2d 1093 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
  • State v. Fayle 658 P.2d 218 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
  • State v. Fayle 658 P.2d 218 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
  • State v. Miller 585 P.2d 244 Ariz. 1978
  • State v. Miller 585 P.2d 244 Ariz. 1978
    State v. Reim, 26 Ariz.App.
  • State v. Susko 562 P.2d 720 Ariz. 1977
  • State v. Susko 562 P.2d 720 Ariz. 1977
    that when there is a conflict between the minutes and the reporter’s transcript, the circumstances of the particular case determine which shall govern.
  • State v. Piper 555 P.2d 636 Ariz. 1976
  • State v. Piper 555 P.2d 636 Ariz. 1976
    State v. McAlvain, supra.
  • 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. Gates 542 P.2d 822 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
  • State v. Gates 542 P.2d 822 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
    Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 21.3(c).
  • State v. Winter 513 P.2d 934 Ariz. 1973
  • State v. Winter 513 P.2d 934 Ariz. 1973
  • State v. Taylor 512 P.2d 590 Ariz. 1973
  • State v. Taylor 512 P.2d 590 Ariz. 1973
  • State v. Howes 508 P.2d 331 Ariz. 1973
  • State v. Howes 508 P.2d 331 Ariz. 1973
    In the instant case, , the judge asked if there were additions or corrections at the conclusion of reading the instructions to the jury.
  • State v. Jefferson 503 P.2d 942 Ariz. 1972
  • State v. Rendel 501 P.2d 42 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1972
  • State v. Rendel 501 P.2d 42 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1972
    See, , , State v. Owen, 2 Ariz.App.
  • State v. Mathewson 498 P.2d 575 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1972
  • State v. Mathewson 498 P.2d 575 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1972
    At the time of settling instructions, counsel requested an instruction on Aggravated Assault.” We hold that the record not only fails to reflect appropriate objections to the instructions as to the offense of aggravated assault, an essential prerequisite to raising the issue on appeal ( , decided 15 June 1972, , ) but that there was an affirmative acquiescence in the giving of the instruction and submitting the issue.