Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Chaney, 686 P.2d 1265.

86 citing documents.

State of Arizona v. Edward Littleton McCauley Ariz. 2026
(stating the trial court observes a juror’s demeanor and tenor of answers and “is in a position to determine first hand whether a juror can render a fair and impartial verdict”).
State of Arizona v. Preston Alton Strong 555 P.3d 537 Ariz. 2024
State of Arizona v. Preston Alton Strong 555 P.3d 537 Ariz. 2024
Actual prejudice occurs when “the jurors have formed preconceived notions concerning the defendant’s guilt and that they cannot leave those notions aside.” Davolt, 207 Ariz. at 206 ¶ 49 ().
State v. Edwards Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Edwards Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
As the court said, “The trial court, which has the opportunity to observe the prospective juror's demeanor and the tenor of his answers, is in a position to determine first hand whether a juror can render a fair and impartial verdict.” (1984) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted).
State of Arizona v. Jamonte Lawrence Olague 381 P.3d 269 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
State of Arizona v. Jamonte Lawrence Olague 381 P.3d 269 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
Hagen, 129 Ariz. at 595, 633 P.2d at 404.
State of Arizona v. Crispin Granados Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
State of Arizona v. Crispin Granados Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
juror’s demeanor and the tenor of his answers, is in a position to determine first hand whether a juror can render a fair and impartial verdict.” (internal quotation marks and citations omitted).
State of Arizona v. Christopher Mathew Payne 306 P.3d 17 Ariz. 2013
State of Arizona v. Christopher Mathew Payne 306 P.3d 17 Ariz. 2013
Actual prejudice is established by 8 STATE V. PAYNE Opinion of the Court showing that sitting jurors “formed preconceived notions concerning the defendant’s guilt.”
State v. Davolt 84 P.3d 456 Ariz. 2004
State v. Davolt 84 P.3d 456 Ariz. 2004
State v. Blakley 65 P.3d 77 Ariz. 2003
State v. Blakley 65 P.3d 77 Ariz. 2003
State of Arizona v. Alice C. Jeffrey Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2002
State of Arizona v. Alice C. Jeffrey Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2002
State v. Carlson 48 P.3d 1180 Ariz. 2002
State v. Carlson 48 P.3d 1180 Ariz. 2002
¶ 27 To prove actual prejudice, Defendant “must show that the jurors have formed preconceived notions concerning [her] guilt and that they cannot lay those notions aside.”
State v. Nordstrom 25 P.3d 717 Ariz. 2001
State v. Nordstrom 25 P.3d 717 Ariz. 2001
A defendant “must show that the jurors have formed preconceived notions concerning the defendant’s guilt and that they cannot lay those notions aside.”
State v. Martinez 999 P.2d 795 Ariz. 2000
State v. Martinez 999 P.2d 795 Ariz. 2000
See, , -03 , -73 (1984) (concluding that it was not abuse for the trial court to refuse to excuse the challenged juror for cause because he assured the court that he could render an impartial verdict).
State v. Trostle 951 P.2d 869 Ariz. 1997
State v. Trostle 951 P.2d 869 Ariz. 1997
To prove actual prejudice, the defendant “must show that the jurors have formed preconceived notions concerning [his] guilt and that they cannot lay those notions aside.”
State v. Dickens 926 P.2d 468 Ariz. 1996
State v. Dickens 926 P.2d 468 Ariz. 1996
State v. Murray 906 P.2d 542 Ariz. 1995
State v. Murray 906 P.2d 542 Ariz. 1995
Defendants did not show that the jurors had “formed preconceived notions concerning the defendants’] guilt and that they [could not] lay those notions aside.”
State v. Walden 905 P.2d 974 Ariz. 1995
State v. Walden 905 P.2d 974 Ariz. 1995
1749 , 90 L.Ed.2d 123 (1986) (potential jurors who indicate that they have already formed an opinion may be rehabilitated through voir dire and serve as jurors); -03 , -73 (1984) (not an abuse of discretion for court to refuse to excuse for cause juror who had stated that “the defendant was obviously guilty” where court received assurances from juror that he could render an impartial verdict).
State v. Williams 904 P.2d 437 Ariz. 1995
State v. Williams 904 P.2d 437 Ariz. 1995
-06 , -62 (1994) (finding victim helpless after the first gunshot disabled him); -13 , -83 (1984) (finding victim helpless after defendant’s first gunshots injured the victim and trapped him in his car).
State v. Stokley 898 P.2d 454 Ariz. 1995
State v. Stokley 898 P.2d 454 Ariz. 1995
Defendant did not show that the jurors had “formed preconceived notions concerning the defendant’s guilt and that they [could not] lay those notions aside.”
State v. Ross 886 P.2d 1354 Ariz. 1994
State v. Ross 886 P.2d 1354 Ariz. 1994
State v. Eastlack 883 P.2d 999 Ariz. 1994
State v. Eastlack 883 P.2d 999 Ariz. 1994
State v. Lopez 857 P.2d 1261 Ariz. 1993
State v. Lopez 857 P.2d 1261 Ariz. 1993
-13 , -83 (1984) (victim had already been shot, and defendant knew that the victim could not resist when he shot him again); , (although originally resisting, the victims were tied up and unable effectively to resist prior to being killed), cer
State v. Schackart 858 P.2d 639 Ariz. 1993
State v. Schackart 858 P.2d 639 Ariz. 1993
State v. Huerta 855 P.2d 776 Ariz. 1993
State v. Huerta 855 P.2d 776 Ariz. 1993
the holding was that the trial judge had not abused his discretion in failing to remove a juror for cause.
State v. Salazar 844 P.2d 566 Ariz. 1992
State v. Atwood 832 P.2d 593 Ariz. 1992
State v. Atwood 832 P.2d 593 Ariz. 1992
(we will not reverse a trial court’s denial of a motion for change of venue absent an abuse of discretion).
State v. Cornell 845 P.2d 1094 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
State v. Cornell 845 P.2d 1094 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992