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. Ceja, 565 P.2d 1274.

30 citing documents.

  • State v. Richmond 886 P.2d 1329 Ariz. 1994
  • State v. Richmond 886 P.2d 1329 Ariz. 1994
  • State v. Kiles 857 P.2d 1212 Ariz. 1993
  • State v. Kiles 857 P.2d 1212 Ariz. 1993
    depraved nature so as to set it apart from the ‘usual or the norm.’ ”
  • State v. White 815 P.2d 869 Ariz. 1991
  • State v. Vickers 675 P.2d 710 Ariz. 1984
  • State v. Vickers 675 P.2d 710 Ariz. 1984
    2733, 2747 , 77 L.Ed.2d 235, 255 (1983); , cert.
  • State v. Harding 670 P.2d 383 Ariz. 1983
  • State v. Harding 670 P.2d 383 Ariz. 1983
  • State v. Richmond 666 P.2d 57 Ariz. 1983
  • State v. Woratzeck 657 P.2d 865 Ariz. 1982
  • State v. Woratzeck 657 P.2d 865 Ariz. 1982
    we said: “We think that defendant’s conduct in continuing his barrage of violence, inflicting wounds and abusing his victims beyond the point necessary to fulfill his plan to steal, beyond even the point necessary to kill, is such an additional circumstance of cruel and depraved natu
  • State v. Britson 636 P.2d 628 Ariz. 1981
  • State v. Britson 636 P.2d 628 Ariz. 1981
    In reviewing the imposition of the death penalty, we are obliged to conduct an “independent examination of the record to determine whether the death penalty was properly imposed.” , , cert, denied, 434 U.S. 975 , 98 S.Ct.
  • State v. Tison 633 P.2d 355 Ariz. 1981
  • State v. Tison 633 P.2d 355 Ariz. 1981
    appeal after remand , , cert.
  • State v. Vickers 633 P.2d 315 Ariz. 1981
  • State v. Vickers 633 P.2d 315 Ariz. 1981
    IMPOSITION OF THE DEATH ' PENALTY Our duty on review of the death penalty is to conduct an “independent examination of the record to determine whether the death penalty was properly imposed.” , , cert.
  • State v. Ceja 612 P.2d 491 Ariz. 1980
  • State v. Ceja 612 P.2d 491 Ariz. 1980
    Previously, on May 16, 1977, , we affirmed the conviction and the death penalty imposed by the trial court pursuant to statute.
  • State v. Steelman 612 P.2d 475 Ariz. 1980
  • State v. Steelman 612 P.2d 475 Ariz. 1980
    See State v. Watson, supra; , , cert.
  • State v. Smith 610 P.2d 46 Ariz. 1980
  • State v. Smith 610 P.2d 46 Ariz. 1980
    The burden of mitigation has consistently been placed on the defendant, see State v. Watson, supra; , -43 , -16 (1977)
  • State v. Lujan 604 P.2d 629 Ariz. 1979
  • State v. Lujan 604 P.2d 629 Ariz. 1979
    as discussed in State v. Knapp, supra, , cert.
  • State v. Flores 603 P.2d 937 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1979
  • State v. Flores 603 P.2d 937 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1979
    appeal after remand, , cert.
  • State v. Watson 586 P.2d 1253 Ariz. 1978
  • State v. Watson 586 P.2d 1253 Ariz. 1978
    Viewing the facts in a light most favorable to upholding the finding of the trial *448 court, , cert.