Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Schad, 788 P.2d 1162.

36 citing documents.

State of Arizona v. Robert Charles Glissendorf 311 P.3d 244 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2013
State of Arizona v. Robert Charles Glissendorf 311 P.3d 244 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2013
free to consider this less- than-ideal police work in deciding the matter”); (instruction adequate when defendant lost opportunity to independently test evidence); (instruction “accomplished the most that the defendant could have proved” from destroyed evidence); (instruction allowed “jury [to] infer exactly what the destroyed evidence, at best, could
State v. Valentini 299 P.3d 751 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
State v. Valentini 299 P.3d 751 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
(holding defendant was not denied unanimous verdict even though court did not give separate verdict forms for premeditated murder and felony murder); , (quoting Encinas), aff'd, 501 U.S. 624 , 111 S.Ct.
State of Arizona v. Rodney Eugene Hardy 283 P.3d 12 Ariz. 2012
State of Arizona v. Rodney Eugene Hardy 283 P.3d 12 Ariz. 2012
But Smith “did not change the substantive rule that it [is] not error to have one form of verdict for first degree murder even though both premeditation and felony murder [are] being submitted to the jury.” (noting that “first degree murder is only one crime” and “the defendant is not entitled to a unanimous jury verdict on the precise manner in which the act was committed”), aff’d, 501 U.S. 624 (1991); ¶ 46 n.11
State v. Cota 272 P.3d 1027 Ariz. 2012
State v. Cota 272 P.3d 1027 Ariz. 2012
State v. Womble 235 P.3d 244 Ariz. 2010
State v. Womble 235 P.3d 244 Ariz. 2010
(finding no unforeseeable judicial enlargement of the (F)(5) pecuniary gain aggravator when a decision issued after the murder “merely recognized the pre-existing scope” of the statute).
State v. Hargrave 234 P.3d 569 Ariz. 2010
State v. Hargrave 234 P.3d 569 Ariz. 2010
¶ 18, (not requiring lesser-included offense instruction for - 15 - robbery serving as the predicate for felony murder in a capital case).
Evanchyk v. Stewart 47 P.3d 1114 Ariz. 2002
Evanchyk v. Stewart 47 P.3d 1114 Ariz. 2002
State v. Nordstrom 25 P.3d 717 Ariz. 2001
State v. Nordstrom 25 P.3d 717 Ariz. 2001
State v. Canion 16 P.3d 788 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
State v. Canion 16 P.3d 788 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
State v. White 982 P.2d 819 Ariz. 1999
State v. White 982 P.2d 819 Ariz. 1999
See id., 154 Ariz. at 249 , 741 P.2d at 1227
State v. Lee 944 P.2d 1222 Ariz. 1997
State v. Lee 944 P.2d 1222 Ariz. 1997
(reviewing death sentence), aff'd, 501 U.S. 624 , 111 S.Ct.
State v. Soto-Fong 928 P.2d 610 Ariz. 1996
State v. Soto-Fong 928 P.2d 610 Ariz. 1996
-21 , -72 (1989), aff'd, 501 U.S. 624 , 111 S.Ct.
State v. Roscoe 910 P.2d 635 Ariz. 1996
State v. Roscoe 910 P.2d 635 Ariz. 1996
aff'd, 501 U.S. 624 , 111 S.Ct.
State v. Murray 906 P.2d 542 Ariz. 1995
State v. Murray 906 P.2d 542 Ariz. 1995
aff'd, 501 U.S. 624 , 111 S.Ct.
State v. Scott 865 P.2d 792 Ariz. 1993
State v. Styers 865 P.2d 765 Ariz. 1993
State v. Styers 865 P.2d 765 Ariz. 1993
aff'd, 501 U.S. 624 , 111 S.Ct.
State v. Scott 865 P.2d 792 Ariz. 1993
aff'd, 501 U.S. 624 , 111 5.
State v. Hill 848 P.2d 1375 Ariz. 1993
State v. Hill 848 P.2d 1375 Ariz. 1993
-44 , -90 (1988); -65 , -61 (1990); -16 , -67 (1989), aff'd, -U.S.
State v. Cook 821 P.2d 731 Ariz. 1991
State v. Cook 821 P.2d 731 Ariz. 1991
2382 , 65 L.Ed.2d 392 (1980); , aff'd, — U.S. -, 111 S.Ct.