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. Hunter, 688 P.2d 980.

264 citing documents.

  • State of Arizona v. Kwame Roy Lowery 287 P.3d 830 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
  • State of Arizona v. Kwame Roy Lowery 287 P.3d 830 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
  • State of Arizona v. Rohan Livingston Butler 286 P.3d 1074 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
  • State of Arizona v. Rohan Livingston Butler 286 P.3d 1074 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
    10 ¶22 Fundamental error is “‘error going to the foundation of the case, error that takes from the defendant a right essential to his defense, and error of such magnitude that the defendant could not possibly have received a fair trial.’”
  • Ruben M. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 282 P.3d 437 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
  • Ruben M. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 282 P.3d 437 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
    ¶ 16 Fundamental error is error that goes “to the foundation of the case, error that takes from the defendant a right essential to his defense, and error of such magnitude that the defendant could not possibly have received a fair trial.” ¶ 19 , ( , ).
  • State of Arizona v. Francisco Antonio Lopez 279 P.3d 640 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
  • State of Arizona v. Francisco Antonio Lopez 279 P.3d 640 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
  • State v. Flores 260 P.3d 309 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
  • State v. Flores 260 P.3d 309 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
    Fundamental error is “ ‘error going to the foundation of the case, error that takes from the defendant a right essential to his defense, and error of such magnitude that the defendant could not possibly have received a fair trial.’” ¶ 19, ( , ).
  • State v. Gray 258 P.3d 242 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2011
  • State v. Gray 258 P.3d 242 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2011
    Id., , ("A conviction based on insufficient evidence constitutes fundamental error.”).
  • State of Arizona v. James Charles Ray Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2010
  • State of Arizona v. James Charles Ray Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2010
  • State v. Kinney 241 P.3d 914 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2010
  • State v. Kinney 241 P.3d 914 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2010
  • State v. Rios 237 P.3d 1052 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
  • State v. Rios 237 P.3d 1052 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
    at 568, ¶ 25 , 115 P.3d at 608 (holding erroneously instructing the jury on burden of proof fundamental error); , (finding fundamental error when "[t]he [jury] instructions did not make it clear that appellant's burden as to self-defense was limited to raising a reasonable doubt and that the burden of the state was then to disprove beyond a reasonable doubt that appellant acted in self defense").
  • State v. Hargrave 234 P.3d 569 Ariz. 2010
  • State v. Hargrave 234 P.3d 569 Ariz. 2010
    - 6 - received a fair trial.” ¶ 19, ( ).
  • State of Arizona v. Maxamilano Paredes-Solano Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2009
  • State of Arizona v. Maxamilano Paredes-Solano Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2009
    “[T]here is a class of 4 Fundamental error is “error going to the foundation of the case, error that takes from the defendant a right essential to his defense, and error of such magnitude that the defendant could not possibly have received a fair trial.”
  • State v. Haney 219 P.3d 274 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
  • State v. Haney 219 P.3d 274 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
    Fundamental error is “error going to the foundation of a case, error that takes from the defendant a right essential to his defense, and error of such magnitude that the defen *67 dant could not possibly have received a fair trial.” ¶ 19 , ( , ).
  • State v. McKenna 214 P.3d 1037 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2009
  • State v. McKenna 214 P.3d 1037 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2009
  • State of Arizona v. Javier Fimbres Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2009
  • State of Arizona v. Javier Fimbres Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2009
  • State v. Bearup 211 P.3d 684 Ariz. 2009
  • State v. Bearup 211 P.3d 684 Ariz. 2009
    (quoting State v. Hunter, 142 Ariz. 88, 90, ).
  • State v. Valverde 208 P.3d 233 Ariz. 2009
  • State v. Valverde 208 P.3d 233 Ariz. 2009
    ¶6 The court of appeals, concluded that “failure to properly instruct the jury regarding the defendant’s burden of proof on self-defense is fundamental error.” Valverde, 220 Ariz. at 174 ¶ 10, 204 P.3d at 432.
  • State of Arizona v. Shawn De Nean Edmisten Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2009
  • State of Arizona v. Shawn De Nean Edmisten Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2009
    Fundamental error involves “‘error going to the foundation of the case, error that takes from the defendant a right essential to his defense, and error of such magnitude that the defendant could not possibly have received a fair trial.’” Henderson, 115 P.3d at 607
  • State v. Valverde 204 P.3d 429 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
  • State v. Valverde 204 P.3d 429 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
  • State v. Karr 212 P.3d 11 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
  • State v. Karr 212 P.3d 11 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
    ¶ 17 , for the proposition that the failure to instruct the jury regarding the burden of proof on self-defense constitutes fundamental error even when the jury is correctly instructed regarding the State’s general burden of proof.
  • State of Arizona v. Alvin Edward Williams Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2008
  • State of Arizona v. Alvin Edward Williams Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2008
    Fundamental error is “‘error going to the foundation of the case, error that takes from the defendant a right essential to his defense, and error of such magnitude that the defendant could not possibly have received a fair trial.’” Henderson, 115 P.3d at 607
  • State of Arizona v. Luis Enrique Ortega Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2008
  • State of Arizona v. Luis Enrique Ortega Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2008
    Fundamental error is “‘error going to the foundation of the case, error that takes from the defendant a right essential to his defense, and error of such magnitude that the defendant could not possibly have received a fair trial.’” Id.
  • State of Arizona v. Robert Carlos Garcia Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2008
  • State of Arizona v. Robert Carlos Garcia Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2008
    iled to object at trial, we review the instructions for fundamental error only, that is, for “‘error going to the foundation of the case, error that takes from the defendant a right essential to his defense, and error of such magnitude that the defendant could not possibly have received a fair trial.’”
  • State v. Bocharski 189 P.3d 403 Ariz. 2008
  • State v. Bocharski 189 P.3d 403 Ariz. 2008
  • State v. Tarkington 187 P.3d 94 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2008
  • State v. Tarkington 187 P.3d 94 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2008
    Fundamental error is “ ‘error going to the foundation of the case, error that takes from the defendant a right essential to his defense, and error of such magnitude that the defendant could not possibly have received a fair trial.’ ” Henderson, , 115 P.3d at 607
  • State v. Moreno-Medrano 185 P.3d 135 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2008
  • State v. Moreno-Medrano 185 P.3d 135 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2008
    Fundamental error is “ ‘error going to the foundation of the case, error that takes from the defendant a right essential to his defense, and error of such magnitude that the defendant could not possibly have received a fair trial.’ ” Id.