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. Noriega, 690 P.2d 775.

86 citing documents.

  • State v. Sammons 749 P.2d 1372 Ariz. 1988
  • State v. Sammons 749 P.2d 1372 Ariz. 1988
    Second, , for the proposition that “if there is an arguably sufficient, but erroneous, allegation in the indictment, the controlling inquiry is whether there was any surprise or prejudice to the defendant____” We do not find this allegation, however, to be “arguably sufficient.” The error at iss
  • State v. Littles 749 P.2d 914 Ariz. 1988
  • State v. Littles 749 P.2d 914 Ariz. 1988
    See id.; -83 , -84 (1984) (notice sufficient even when the indictment cited the wrong enhancement provision in A.R.S.
  • State v. Reid 747 P.2d 560 Ariz. 1987
  • State v. Reid 747 P.2d 560 Ariz. 1987
  • State v. Walters 748 P.2d 777 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
  • State v. Walters 748 P.2d 777 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
  • State v. Pacheco 730 P.2d 262 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
  • State v. Pacheco 730 P.2d 262 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
    Furthermore, our supreme court has held that the lack of substantial injury does not always reflect the danger a defendant poses to society, , and has approved the imposition of enhanced punishment under repeat offender statutes despite the absence of serious injury.
  • State v. Plew 722 P.2d 243 Ariz. 1986
  • State v. Plew 722 P.2d 243 Ariz. 1986
  • State v. Castaneda 724 P.2d 1 Ariz. 1986
  • State v. Castaneda 724 P.2d 1 Ariz. 1986
    When a defendant is given Miranda warnings upon arrest “[fjurther warnings are not required in the absence of circumstances between the arrest and interrogation which would alert the officers that the accused may not be fully aware of [his] rights.”
  • State v. Ferguson 717 P.2d 879 Ariz. 1986
  • State v. Ferguson 717 P.2d 879 Ariz. 1986
  • State v. Kelly 716 P.2d 1052 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
  • State v. Kelly 716 P.2d 1052 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
    the defendant was convicted of assaulting with a gun a man who chased her, after he saw her burglarizing a home.
  • State v. Cocio 709 P.2d 1336 Ariz. 1985
  • State v. Cocio 709 P.2d 1336 Ariz. 1985
    § 13-604.01 , in which defendant was convicted of aggravated assault and first degree burglary with two prior convictions.
  • State v. Borbon 706 P.2d 718 Ariz. 1985
  • State v. Borbon 706 P.2d 718 Ariz. 1985
    the defendant threatened to use the handgun she was carrying but never did so.
  • State v. Best 703 P.2d 548 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1985
  • State v. Best 703 P.2d 548 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1985
  • State v. Perkins 699 P.2d 364 Ariz. 1985
  • State v. Perkins 699 P.2d 364 Ariz. 1985
  • State v. Williams 698 P.2d 724 Ariz. 1985
  • State v. Williams 698 P.2d 724 Ariz. 1985
  • State v. Williams 698 P.2d 678 Ariz. 1985
  • State v. Williams 698 P.2d 678 Ariz. 1985
  • State v. Waggoner 697 P.2d 320 Ariz. 1985
  • State v. Waggoner 697 P.2d 320 Ariz. 1985
    Likewise, , we upheld a post-conviction amendment to an indictment changing A.R.S.
  • State v. Freader 696 P.2d 1373 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
  • State v. Freader 696 P.2d 1373 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
  • State v. Hutton 694 P.2d 216 Ariz. 1985
  • State v. Hutton 694 P.2d 216 Ariz. 1985