Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Tison, 633 P.2d 355.

264 citing documents.

State v. Poehnelt 722 P.2d 304 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1985
Rutledge v. Arizona Board of Regents 711 P.2d 1207 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
Rutledge v. Arizona Board of Regents 711 P.2d 1207 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
rehearing denied, 459 U.S. 882 , 103 S.Ct.
State v. Gerlaugh 698 P.2d 694 Ariz. 1985
State v. Gerlaugh 698 P.2d 694 Ariz. 1985
See State v. [Raymond] Tison, , -66 (1981), cert.
State v. Poland 698 P.2d 207 Ariz. 1985
State v. Poland 698 P.2d 207 Ariz. 1985
(drowning Purolator guards after robbery); State v. Gretzler, supra, (defendants committed the murders “to obtain a substitute car in which they could continue their flight”); , cert.
State v. Nash 694 P.2d 222 Ariz. 1985
State v. Nash 694 P.2d 222 Ariz. 1985
State v. Meeker 693 P.2d 911 Ariz. 1984
State v. Meeker 693 P.2d 911 Ariz. 1984
State v. Hensley 691 P.2d 689 Ariz. 1984
State v. Hensley 691 P.2d 689 Ariz. 1984
(drowning Purolator guards after robbery); State v. Gretzler, supra, (defendants committed the murders “to obtain a substitute car in which they could continue their flight”); , cert.
State v. Goswick 691 P.2d 673 Ariz. 1984
State v. Goswick 691 P.2d 673 Ariz. 1984
State v. Clabourne 690 P.2d 54 Ariz. 1984
State v. Clabourne 690 P.2d 54 Ariz. 1984
A Rule 20 Judgment of Acquittal shall be granted if there is “no substantial evidence to warrant a conviction.” We have defined substantial evidence to mean “more than a scintilla and is such proof as a reasonable mind would employ to support the conclusion reached.” State v. (Raymond) Tison, , cert.
State v. Tison 690 P.2d 755 Ariz. 1984
State v. Tison 690 P.2d 747 Ariz. 1984
State v. Tison 690 P.2d 747 Ariz. 1984
The facts of this case are set forth in our decision on direct appeal, see (Ricky) Tison, supra, and in the companion case, State v. (Raymond) Tison
State v. Tison 690 P.2d 755 Ariz. 1984
See State v. (Raymond) Tison
State v. McNair 687 P.2d 1230 Ariz. 1984
State v. McNair 687 P.2d 1230 Ariz. 1984
State v. (Raymond Curtis) Tison, , (citations omitted).
State v. Swartz 683 P.2d 315 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1984
State v. Swartz 683 P.2d 315 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1984
State v. Harding 687 P.2d 1247 Ariz. 1984
State v. Harding 687 P.2d 1247 Ariz. 1984
2444 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1327 (1983); , , cert.
State v. Schultz 681 P.2d 374 Ariz. 1984
State v. Schultz 681 P.2d 374 Ariz. 1984
We realize that “proof of ineffectiveness must be a demonstrable reality and not merely a matter of speculation.” , cert.
State v. Mincey 687 P.2d 1180 Ariz. 1984
State v. Mincey 687 P.2d 1180 Ariz. 1984
2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979); , cert.
State v. LaGrand 674 P.2d 338 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1983
State v. LaGrand 674 P.2d 338 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1983
State v. McCall 677 P.2d 920 Ariz. 1983
State v. McCall 677 P.2d 920 Ariz. 1983
(defendant pointed a gun at a third party merely to quiet her; subsequent murder of victim by other means did not subject third party to danger); State v. (Raymond) Tison, , cert.
State v. Haas 675 P.2d 673 Ariz. 1983
State v. Haas 675 P.2d 673 Ariz. 1983
In determining whether there was sufficient evidence to support defendant’s convictions, however, “this Court will not engage in reweighing the evidence.” , cert.
State v. Oppenheimer 673 P.2d 318 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
State v. Oppenheimer 673 P.2d 318 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
State v. Harding 670 P.2d 383 Ariz. 1983
State v. Harding 670 P.2d 383 Ariz. 1983
See State v. Gretzler, supra; , cert.
State v. Suarez 670 P.2d 1192 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
State v. Suarez 670 P.2d 1192 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
State v. Routhier 669 P.2d 68 Ariz. 1983
State v. Routhier 669 P.2d 68 Ariz. 1983
State v. Edwards 665 P.2d 59 Ariz. 1983
State v. Edwards 665 P.2d 59 Ariz. 1983
-53 , -62 (1981); , cf. Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 315 , 99 S.Ct.
State v. McDaniel 665 P.2d 70 Ariz. 1983
State v. McDaniel 665 P.2d 70 Ariz. 1983
State v. Gerlaugh 659 P.2d 642 Ariz. 1983