Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Jeffers, 661 P.2d 1105.

243 citing documents.

State v. Anaya 799 P.2d 876 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
State v. Robinson 796 P.2d 853 Ariz. 1990
State v. Shearer 793 P.2d 86 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
State v. Robinson 796 P.2d 853 Ariz. 1990
State v. Shearer 793 P.2d 86 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
In Re a Member of the State Bar of Arizona, Fresquez 783 P.2d 774 Ariz. 1989
In Re a Member of the State Bar of Arizona, Fresquez 783 P.2d 774 Ariz. 1989
Martin, 135 Ariz. at 554 , 663 P.2d at 238 ; -24 , -25 (1983).
State v. Fulminante 778 P.2d 602 Ariz. 1989
State v. Fulminante 778 P.2d 602 Ariz. 1989
State v. Carver 771 P.2d 1382 Ariz. 1989
State v. Carver 771 P.2d 1382 Ariz. 1989
521 , 83 L.Ed.2d 409 (1984); , (defendant caused mail order company to send unsolicited mailings to judge; insufficient to show bias and disqualification unnecessary), cer t. denied, 464 U.S. 865 , 104 S.Ct.
State v. Whitney 768 P.2d 638 Ariz. 1989
State v. Whitney 768 P.2d 638 Ariz. 1989
State v. Oliver 760 P.2d 1071 Ariz. 1988
State v. Oliver 760 P.2d 1071 Ariz. 1988
(Supp.1987); , , , cert.
State v. Wagstaff 775 P.2d 1130 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
State v. Allen 755 P.2d 1153 Ariz. 1988
State v. Allen 755 P.2d 1153 Ariz. 1988
we stated: The primary concern of the confrontation clause is to assure that the jury has an adequate basis upon which to evaluate the truth of the statement.
State v. Charo 754 P.2d 288 Ariz. 1988
State v. Charo 754 P.2d 288 Ariz. 1988
State v. Carr 743 P.2d 1386 Ariz. 1987
State v. Carr 743 P.2d 1386 Ariz. 1987
State v. Rossi 741 P.2d 1223 Ariz. 1987
State v. Rossi 741 P.2d 1223 Ariz. 1987
State v. Neil, 4 Ariz.App.
State v. Robinson 735 P.2d 801 Ariz. 1987
State v. Robinson 735 P.2d 801 Ariz. 1987
Hawkins v. Allstate Insurance 733 P.2d 1073 Ariz. 1987
Hawkins v. Allstate Insurance 733 P.2d 1073 Ariz. 1987
State v. Schackart 737 P.2d 398 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1987
State v. Schackart 737 P.2d 398 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1987
“[I]f evidence is relevant for any purpose other than that of showing the defendant’s criminal propensities, it is admissible even though it refers to his prior bad acts.” , , cert.
State v. Moreno 734 P.2d 609 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
State v. Moreno 734 P.2d 609 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
State v. McMurtrey 726 P.2d 202 Ariz. 1986
State v. McMurtrey 726 P.2d 202 Ariz. 1986
State v. Schrock 719 P.2d 1049 Ariz. 1986
State v. Schrock 719 P.2d 1049 Ariz. 1986
Lewin v. Miller Wagner & Co., Ltd. 725 P.2d 736 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
Lewin v. Miller Wagner & Co., Ltd. 725 P.2d 736 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
State v. Leonard 725 P.2d 493 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
State v. Leonard 725 P.2d 493 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
State v. Bush 714 P.2d 818 Ariz. 1986
State v. Bush 714 P.2d 818 Ariz. 1986
Large v. Superior Court 714 P.2d 399 Ariz. 1986
Large v. Superior Court 714 P.2d 399 Ariz. 1986
State v. Cannon 713 P.2d 273 Ariz. 1985
State v. Cannon 713 P.2d 273 Ariz. 1985
State v. Sparks 708 P.2d 732 Ariz. 1985
State v. Sparks 708 P.2d 732 Ariz. 1985
State v. Lindsey 720 P.2d 94 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1985
State v. Lindsey 720 P.2d 94 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1985