Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Stenrud, 553 P.2d 1201.

29 citing documents.

State v. Draper 784 P.2d 259 Ariz. 1989
State v. Draper 784 P.2d 259 Ariz. 1989
State v. Allen 755 P.2d 1153 Ariz. 1988
State v. Allen 755 P.2d 1153 Ariz. 1988
a clear danger of convicting the innocent.”
State v. Adams 750 P.2d 31 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
State v. Adams 750 P.2d 31 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
State v. Zamora 746 P.2d 1327 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1987
State v. Zamora 746 P.2d 1327 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1987
we conclude that the holdings in Phillips and Lukens should not be applied retroactively.
State v. LeMaster 669 P.2d 592 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
State v. LeMaster 669 P.2d 592 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
In re the Appeal in Maricopa County Juvenile Action No. J-87432 616 P.2d 97 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980
In re the Appeal in Maricopa County Juvenile Action No. J-87432 616 P.2d 97 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980
In response, , , and State v. Price, 27 Ariz.App.
State v. Gates 576 P.2d 1357 Ariz. 1978
State v. Gates 576 P.2d 1357 Ariz. 1978
State v. Goettel 572 P.2d 115 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1977
State v. Goettel 572 P.2d 115 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1977
State v. Malone 573 P.2d 888 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1977
State v. Drozd 569 P.2d 272 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1977
State v. Drozd 569 P.2d 272 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1977
State v. Encinas 571 P.2d 283 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1977
State v. Encinas 571 P.2d 283 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1977
appears to be directly on point.
State v. Ray 560 P.2d 1287 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1977
State v. Ray 560 P.2d 1287 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1977
1967 , 18 L.Ed.2d 1199 (1967).” , at 1202, 1203 (1976).
State v. Rios 562 P.2d 385 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1977
State v. Rios 562 P.2d 385 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1977
327 , holding that State v. Rios is inapplicable to guilty plea proceedings occurring prior to the date of the filing of the court’s opinion in Rios , February 6, 1976.
State v. Price 558 P.2d 701 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
State v. Price 558 P.2d 701 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
However, , the Supreme Court held that Rios would have only prospective application.
State v. Lopez 557 P.2d 558 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976
State v. Lopez 557 P.2d 558 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1976