Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Vickers, 633 P.2d 315.

98 citing documents.

State of Arizona v. Christopher Michael Montoya 554 P.3d 473 Ariz. 2024
State of Arizona v. Christopher Michael Montoya 554 P.3d 473 Ariz. 2024
“[W]e will consider a matter on appeal not raised below [only] if it is a matter of fundamental error.”
State of Arizona v. James Clayton Johnson Ariz. 2019
State of Arizona v. James Clayton Johnson Ariz. 2019
(upholding the finding of depravity where the defendant carved “Bonzai” on the victim’s back after killing him).
State v. Gipson 277 P.3d 189 Ariz. 2012
State v. Gipson 277 P.3d 189 Ariz. 2012
State v. Bocharski 189 P.3d 403 Ariz. 2008
State v. Bocharski 189 P.3d 403 Ariz. 2008
See, e.g., State v. Pandeli (Pandeli I), 200 Ariz. 365, 376 ¶ 41, (excising parts of the victim’s breasts after her death); State v. Vickers, 129 Ariz. 506, 515, (carving of word “Bonzai” in victim’s back after killing him).
State v. Murdaugh 97 P.3d 844 Ariz. 2004
State v. Murdaugh 97 P.3d 844 Ariz. 2004
Mutilation after death reflects a “mental state that is ‘marked by debasement.’ ”
State v. Booker 53 P.3d 635 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2002
State v. Booker 53 P.3d 635 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2002
P.2d 272, 276 (1984) (same), , (“Premeditation is established by evidence of a plan to murder formed after deliberation and reflection.”); State v. Vickers (Vickers II), , (same); , (same); State v. Vickers (Vickers I), , (same).
In Re Jorge D. 43 P.3d 605 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2002
In Re Jorge D. 43 P.3d 605 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2002
State v. Sansing 26 P.3d 1118 Ariz. 2001
State v. Sansing 26 P.3d 1118 Ariz. 2001
State v. Sharp 973 P.2d 1171 Ariz. 1999
State v. Sharp 973 P.2d 1171 Ariz. 1999
rev’d on other grounds, Vickers v. Ricketts, 798 F.2d 369 (9th Cir.1986) (habeas corpus proceeding) (holding that the prosecution could not admit in its case-in-chief statements Vickers gave to a psychologist associate employed at the state prison because the employee failed to give Miranda warn
State v. Dickens 926 P.2d 468 Ariz. 1996
State v. Dickens 926 P.2d 468 Ariz. 1996
See Rules 21.2, 21.3(c); -13 , -22 (1981).
State v. Mata 916 P.2d 1035 Ariz. 1996
State v. Mata 916 P.2d 1035 Ariz. 1996
The next factor for which we supplied a label in Gretzler was “needless mutilation of the victim.” See Gretzler, 135 Ariz. at 52 , 659 P.2d at 11 ( , and State v. Smith.
State v. Krone 897 P.2d 621 Ariz. 1995
State v. Krone 897 P.2d 621 Ariz. 1995
6 , which relied upon Beck v. Alabama, 447 U.S. 625, 100 S.Ct.
State v. Richmond 886 P.2d 1329 Ariz. 1994
State v. Richmond 886 P.2d 1329 Ariz. 1994
here was disfigured, we agree with the concurring justices in Richmond II that “mutilation” requires an “indication of a separate purpose to mutilate the corpse.” Richmond II, 136 Ariz. at 323 , 666 P.2d at 68 ; , (numerous post-mortem stab wounds indicated needless mutilation and use of gratuitous violence); , (defendant’s carving of word “Bonzai” in victim’s back after killing him supported finding of depravity).
State v. Vickers 885 P.2d 1086 Ariz. 1994
State v. Vickers 885 P.2d 1086 Ariz. 1994
State v. Cornell 878 P.2d 1352 Ariz. 1994
State v. Cornell 878 P.2d 1352 Ariz. 1994
(raising one objection at trial does not preserve another objection on appeal unless fundamental error) ( , ).
State v. West 862 P.2d 192 Ariz. 1993
State v. West 862 P.2d 192 Ariz. 1993
State v. Spencer 859 P.2d 146 Ariz. 1993
State v. Spencer 859 P.2d 146 Ariz. 1993
in which this court interpreted Beck to require such instructions even when defense counsel fails to request them.
State v. Brewer 826 P.2d 783 Ariz. 1992
Followed State v. Brewer 826 P.2d 783 Ariz. 1992
Richmond, 114 Ariz. at 196 , 560 P.2d at 51
State v. Melendez 812 P.2d 1093 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1991
State v. Melendez 812 P.2d 1093 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1991
State v. Schad 788 P.2d 1162 Ariz. 1989
State v. Schad 788 P.2d 1162 Ariz. 1989
State v. Dumaine 783 P.2d 1184 Ariz. 1989
State v. Dumaine 783 P.2d 1184 Ariz. 1989
State v. Rockwell 775 P.2d 1069 Ariz. 1989
State v. Rockwell 775 P.2d 1069 Ariz. 1989
State v. Olsen 760 P.2d 603 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
State v. Olsen 760 P.2d 603 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
State v. Whittle 752 P.2d 494 Ariz. 1988
State v. Whittle 752 P.2d 494 Ariz. 1988
-13 , -22 (1981); , State v. Arnold, 25 Ariz.App.
State v. Davis 742 P.2d 1356 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1987
State v. Davis 742 P.2d 1356 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1987