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. Crowley, 528 P.2d 834.

69 citing documents.

  • State v. Offing 551 P.2d 556 Ariz. 1976
    Where as in this case, “the preliminary hearing transcript shows that the evidence is more than sufficient to support a finding of guilty, such an agreement has the same effect as a plea of guilty.”
  • State v. Cruz 550 P.2d 1086 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
  • State v. Cruz 550 P.2d 1086 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
    and State v. Jackson, 23 Ariz.App.
  • State v. Gaines 549 P.2d 574 Ariz. 1976
  • State v. Gaines 549 P.2d 574 Ariz. 1976
    we held that an agreement by the parties to submit the matter on the preliminary hearing transcript, when such an agreement is tantamount to a plea of guilty, requires compliance with the mandates of Boykin .
  • State v. Eliason 544 P.2d 1124 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
  • State v. Eliason 544 P.2d 1124 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
    the Supreme Court, faced with a defendant who had also submitted the issue of guilt based upon the preliminary hearing record, stated that: “The trial court must determine, and the record must reflect, that the defendant understood the significance and consequences of submitting the case on the
  • State v. Sardo 543 P.2d 1138 Ariz. 1975
  • State v. Sardo 543 P.2d 1138 Ariz. 1975
    On appeal they contend that the case should be remanded for a
  • State v. Fox 542 P.2d 800 Ariz. 1975
  • State v. Fox 542 P.2d 800 Ariz. 1975
  • State v. Smith 541 P.2d 918 Ariz. 1975
  • State v. Smith 541 P.2d 918 Ariz. 1975
    we held: “Due process requires that the trial court make a record similar to that required by Boykin v. Alabama, supra, to determine if the decision to submit the case on the preliminary hearing transcript was freely, intelligently, and voluntarily made.” 528 P.2d at 837 .
  • State v. Zaragoza 537 P.2d 1336 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1975
  • State v. Zaragoza 537 P.2d 1336 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1975
    Second, defendant argues that the record does not manifest that his waiver of a jury trial was made knowingly, , in that there was no showing that he was advised of the range of sentencing which could be imposed should the trial court find him guilty.
  • State v. Jackson 537 P.2d 1366 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1975
  • State v. Jackson 537 P.2d 1366 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1975
    mandates a reversal of his conviction and sentence because the trial judge did not, prior to accepting a submission of the case on the police reports, advise him of the possible range of punishment provided by statute for the charge involved.
  • State v. Salas 532 P.2d 872 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1975
  • State v. Salas 532 P.2d 872 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1975
    State v. Mendiola, 23 Ariz.App.