Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Childs, 553 P.2d 1192.

87 citing documents.

State v. Bartik Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
State v. Bartik Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
We will reverse only where a complete absence of probative facts supports the conviction, and will not reweigh the evidence or evaluate the credibility of witnesses
State v. Nelson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Nelson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State of Arizona v. Jamonte Lawrence Olague 381 P.3d 269 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
State of Arizona v. Jamonte Lawrence Olague 381 P.3d 269 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
(hereinafter Hagen), ¶¶ 12-13, -24, -98 (1976); -80, -54 (App. 1975); (“vague allegations of ‘dictatorial means’ tainting the deliberations” held not to be misconduct).
State v. Uriarte 981 P.2d 575 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
State v. Spears 908 P.2d 1062 Ariz. 1996
State v. Spears 908 P.2d 1062 Ariz. 1996
-24 , -98 (1976) (discounting affidavit from one juror impeaching verdict because nothing in record indicated that jurors were guilty of misconduct).
State v. Kamai 911 P.2d 626 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
State v. Kamai 911 P.2d 626 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
State v. Vild 746 P.2d 1304 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
State v. Vild 746 P.2d 1304 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
Appellant claims that the proposed instruction was a correct statement of the law in that good character alone may generate a reasonable doubt
State v. Turrentine 730 P.2d 238 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
State v. Turrentine 730 P.2d 238 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
State v. Kreps 706 P.2d 1213 Ariz. 1985
State v. Kreps 706 P.2d 1213 Ariz. 1985
State v. Adams 703 P.2d 510 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1985
State v. Adams 703 P.2d 510 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1985
the supreme court stated that an instruction on good character must inform the jury that good character testimony in connection with all the other evidence may generate a reasonable doubt.
Murdock-Bryant Construction, Inc. v. Pearson 703 P.2d 1206 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
Murdock-Bryant Construction, Inc. v. Pearson 703 P.2d 1206 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
State v. Fristoe 658 P.2d 825 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
State v. Fristoe 658 P.2d 825 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
State v. Gerlaugh 654 P.2d 800 Ariz. 1982
State v. Gerlaugh 654 P.2d 800 Ariz. 1982
In Re the Appeal in Maricopa County, Juvenile Action No. JS-4130 647 P.2d 184 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
In Re the Appeal in Maricopa County, Juvenile Action No. JS-4130 647 P.2d 184 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
State v. Hall 633 P.2d 398 Ariz. 1981
State v. Hall 633 P.2d 398 Ariz. 1981
Jackson v. Virginia, supra
State v. Tison 633 P.2d 355 Ariz. 1981
State v. Tison 633 P.2d 355 Ariz. 1981
State v. Clark 616 P.2d 888 Ariz. 1980
State v. Clark 616 P.2d 888 Ariz. 1980
State v. Roberts 612 P.2d 1055 Ariz. 1980
State v. Roberts 612 P.2d 1055 Ariz. 1980
State v. Dickey 608 P.2d 302 Ariz. 1980
State v. Dickey 608 P.2d 302 Ariz. 1980
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the state, , the following facts emerge.
State v. Marvin 606 P.2d 406 Ariz. 1980
State v. Marvin 606 P.2d 406 Ariz. 1980
we specifically held that the elements of wilfulness and deliberation are implied in the definition of premeditation.
State v. Sanders 604 P.2d 20 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1979
State v. Sanders 604 P.2d 20 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1979
State v. Edgar 605 P.2d 454 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1979
State v. Edgar 605 P.2d 454 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1979
State v. Lawrence 599 P.2d 754 Ariz. 1979
State v. Lawrence 599 P.2d 754 Ariz. 1979
State v. Figueroa 593 P.2d 940 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1979
State v. Figueroa 593 P.2d 940 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1979
State v. Gracia 590 P.2d 1363 Ariz. 1979
State v. Gracia 590 P.2d 1363 Ariz. 1979
State v. Siqueiros 591 P.2d 557 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1978