Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Graham, 660 P.2d 460.

68 citing documents.

State of Arizona v. Charles Michael Hedlund 431 P.3d 181 Ariz. 2018
Distinguished State of Arizona v. Charles Michael Hedlund 431 P.3d 181 Ariz. 2018
¶38 in which we determined that leniency was appropriate, is also distinguishable.
State of Arizona v. Heulon Colston Brown 310 P.3d 29 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2013
State of Arizona v. Heulon Colston Brown 310 P.3d 29 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2013
State v. Murdaugh 97 P.3d 844 Ariz. 2004
State v. Murdaugh 97 P.3d 844 Ariz. 2004
( ¶ 50 , , , , Gretzler, 135 Ariz. at 57-58 , 659 P.2d at 16-17 ).
State v. Greene 967 P.2d 106 Ariz. 1998
State v. Rossi 830 P.2d 797 Ariz. 1992
State v. Rossi 830 P.2d 797 Ariz. 1992
(defendant suffered from a mental disease caused by a chemical disorder in the brain); , (defendant ingested large quantities of drugs and alcohol up to forty-five minutes before the murder); , (defendant had been taking prescription drugs since age seven); , (defendant suffered from a brain lesion); , (court found defendant’s mental illness was a substantial factor in causing the mur
State v. Brewer 826 P.2d 783 Ariz. 1992
State v. Brewer 826 P.2d 783 Ariz. 1992
See, -59 , -800 (1990) (schizotypal psychotic illness, command hallucinations and voices, borderline intelligence); , (chemical disorder in the brain); , (valium intoxication, neurological problems, and brain damage); , (“prenatal neurological lesion” that disrupted the integration and storage of information).
State v. Greenway 823 P.2d 22 Ariz. 1991
State v. Greenway 823 P.2d 22 Ariz. 1991
outweighed finding that murder of 5-year-old victim was heinous and depraved); Rockwell, , (defendant’s character and background, his age at the time of the murder (age 21) and the unique circumstances of his conviction outweighed finding that the killing was done for pecuniary gain); , (defendant’s diminished capacity to appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct, lack of other adult convictions and no tendency toward violent crimes outweighed finding that killing was done for pecuniary gain);
State v. Lopez 822 P.2d 465 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
State v. Lopez 822 P.2d 465 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
I will leave it up to you guys if I need an attorney.”); , (in light of the circumstances surrounding statement, defendant’s request to have tape recorder turned off during interview was not an invocation of right to remain silent).
State v. Lavers 814 P.2d 333 Ariz. 1991
State v. Lavers 814 P.2d 333 Ariz. 1991
State v. Comer 799 P.2d 333 Ariz. 1990
State v. Comer 799 P.2d 333 Ariz. 1990
State v. Schad 788 P.2d 1162 Ariz. 1989
State v. Schad 788 P.2d 1162 Ariz. 1989
We have also reduced the defendant’s sentence where the defendant was mentally impaired, , , or very young when he committed the crime.
State v. Fulminante 778 P.2d 602 Ariz. 1989
State v. Fulminante 778 P.2d 602 Ariz. 1989
State v. Rockwell 775 P.2d 1069 Ariz. 1989
State v. Rockwell 775 P.2d 1069 Ariz. 1989
(death sentence reduced to life because mitigating factors of age, mental health, and defendant’s character outweighed the one aggravating circumstance of pecuniary gain).
State v. Walton 769 P.2d 1017 Ariz. 1989
State v. Walton 769 P.2d 1017 Ariz. 1989
(but other circumstances suggested that Graham was motivated by peer pressure, not a depraved mind).
State v. Whitney 768 P.2d 638 Ariz. 1989
State v. Whitney 768 P.2d 638 Ariz. 1989
State v. Stevens 764 P.2d 724 Ariz. 1988
State v. Stevens 764 P.2d 724 Ariz. 1988
the defendant had been drinking the night of the murder and talking with a 16-year-old about the possibility of robbing the victim.
State v. Bravo 762 P.2d 1318 Ariz. 1988
State v. Bravo 762 P.2d 1318 Ariz. 1988
State v. Tucker 759 P.2d 579 Ariz. 1988
State v. Tucker 759 P.2d 579 Ariz. 1988
State v. McMurtrey 726 P.2d 202 Ariz. 1986
State v. McMurtrey 726 P.2d 202 Ariz. 1986
(no aggravating factors, so death sentence improper); , (substantial mental impairment from long-standing drug addiction, neurological problems and brain damage); , (youth of defendant); , (substantial mental impairment caused by brain lesion); S
State v. Livanos 725 P.2d 505 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
State v. Livanos 725 P.2d 505 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
State v. Castaneda 724 P.2d 1 Ariz. 1986
State v. Castaneda 724 P.2d 1 Ariz. 1986
(defendant did not create grave risk of danger to others or commit murder in cruel, heinous, or depraved manner, and no aggravating circumstances); , , (substantial mental impairment due to drug addiction, neurological problems and brain damage; vulnerability to influence; lack of prior record of violence); State v. Valen *396 cia, , (youth of defendant); , (chan
State v. Guillen 726 P.2d 212 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
State v. Guillen 726 P.2d 212 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
State v. Griffin 713 P.2d 283 Ariz. 1986
State v. Griffin 713 P.2d 283 Ariz. 1986
State v. Bracy 703 P.2d 464 Ariz. 1985
State v. Bracy 703 P.2d 464 Ariz. 1985
State v. Gerlaugh 698 P.2d 694 Ariz. 1985
Distinguished State v. Gerlaugh 698 P.2d 694 Ariz. 1985
(21-year-old defendant without any prior violent offenses committed murder while his reasoning ability was clouded by drugs, a drug habit that began with prescription drug usage at the age of seven); , (defendant was homosexually assaul
State v. Poland 698 P.2d 207 Ariz. 1985