DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Encinas, 647 P.2d 624.

75 citing documents.

  • State v. Vess 756 P.2d 333 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1988
    Matter of Pima County Juvenile Action No. 63212-2
  • State v. Williams 800 P.2d 1240 Ariz. 1987
  • State v. Williams 800 P.2d 1240 Ariz. 1987
  • State v. Correll 715 P.2d 721 Ariz. 1986
  • State v. Correll 715 P.2d 721 Ariz. 1986
    In the first case, , the defendant and another accomplice helped to hold the victim down on the road while a third accomplice drove over him with a car.
  • State v. Gerlaugh 698 P.2d 694 Ariz. 1985
  • State v. Gerlaugh 698 P.2d 694 Ariz. 1985
    After a joint trial, petitioner Darrick Leonard Gerlaugh and codefendant Joseph Albert Encinas ( , ), were convicted of first degree murder, A.R.S.
  • State v. Bishop 698 P.2d 1240 Ariz. 1985
  • State v. Bishop 698 P.2d 1240 Ariz. 1985
    petitioner advanced the argument that because the verdict was undifferentiated there was no assurance that the jury had been unanimous on “what kind” of first degree murder had been committed.
  • State v. Rodriquez 700 P.2d 855 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
  • State v. Rodriquez 700 P.2d 855 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
    See, , (hypnotized witness’s testimony deemed insignificant in view of overwhelming evidence of guilt provided by defendant’s own words and scientific evidence).
  • State v. Lamb 690 P.2d 764 Ariz. 1984
  • State v. Lamb 690 P.2d 764 Ariz. 1984
  • State v. Emery 688 P.2d 175 Ariz. 1984
  • State v. Emery 688 P.2d 175 Ariz. 1984
  • State v. Vickers 675 P.2d 710 Ariz. 1984
  • State v. Vickers 675 P.2d 710 Ariz. 1984
  • State v. Berndt 672 P.2d 1311 Ariz. 1983
  • State v. Berndt 672 P.2d 1311 Ariz. 1983
  • State v. Young 661 P.2d 1138 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
  • State v. Young 661 P.2d 1138 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
    Our conclusion in this regard is fortified by the Arizona Supreme Court’s most recent opinions dealing with hypnosis issues, , , .
  • State v. Gerlaugh 654 P.2d 800 Ariz. 1982
  • State v. Gerlaugh 654 P.2d 800 Ariz. 1982
  • State v. Sorrell 645 P.2d 1242 Ariz. 1982
  • State v. Sorrell 645 P.2d 1242 Ariz. 1982
    Of course, an accused may change his mind after he has elected to remain silent and decide to speak, , Rhode Island v. Innis, 446 U.S. 291 , 100 S.Ct.