Cited by
Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Schilleman, 609 P.2d 564.
- State of Arizona v. Allyn Akeem Smith 475 P.3d 558 Ariz. 2020
-
State of Arizona v. Allyn Akeem Smith
475 P.3d 558
Ariz. 2020
(finding ten seconds insufficient); State v. (Ronald T.) Williams, (finding approximately five seconds insufficient).
- State v. Vaughn Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
-
State v. Vaughn
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
See Old Chief v. United States, 519 U.S. 172, 189 (1997)
- State v. Schurz 859 P.2d 156 Ariz. 1993
- State v. Schurz 859 P.2d 156 Ariz. 1993
- State v. Youngblood 844 P.2d 1152 Ariz. 1993
- State v. Tucker 759 P.2d 579 Ariz. 1988
-
State v. Tucker
759 P.2d 579
Ariz. 1988
P.2d 743 (1986) (“Due process [does not] require the police to preserve indefinitely evidence after a qualified technician has concluded that it has no probative value, so that an as yet unknown defendant may later make his own examination of the evidence.”) (
- State v. Bracy 703 P.2d 464 Ariz. 1985
- State v. Bracy 703 P.2d 464 Ariz. 1985
- State v. Wiley 698 P.2d 1244 Ariz. 1985
-
State v. Wiley
698 P.2d 1244
Ariz. 1985
Defendant does not allege that these tests were unreliable or performed in a negligent manner
- State v. Perkins 686 P.2d 1248 Ariz. 1984
- State v. Perkins 686 P.2d 1248 Ariz. 1984
- State v. Edwards 677 P.2d 1325 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
- State v. McCall 677 P.2d 920 Ariz. 1983
- State v. McCall 677 P.2d 920 Ariz. 1983
- State v. Conn 669 P.2d 585 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1982
- State v. Conn 669 P.2d 585 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1982
- State v. Jessen 633 P.2d 410 Ariz. 1981
-
State v. Jessen
633 P.2d 410
Ariz. 1981
Rule 21.3(c), Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure.
- State v. Nelson 633 P.2d 391 Ariz. 1981
- State v. Nelson 633 P.2d 391 Ariz. 1981
- State v. Brooks 618 P.2d 624 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980
- State v. Brooks 618 P.2d 624 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980