Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Nash, 694 P.2d 222.

406 citing documents.

State v. Edwards 739 P.2d 1325 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
State v. Edwards 739 P.2d 1325 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
State v. Moreno 734 P.2d 609 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
State v. Moreno 734 P.2d 609 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
State v. Smith 762 P.2d 506 Ariz. 1986
State v. Smith 762 P.2d 506 Ariz. 1986
State v. McMurtrey 726 P.2d 202 Ariz. 1986
State v. McMurtrey 726 P.2d 202 Ariz. 1986
Other cases, where we have upheld the death sentence, that involved a finding of “grave risk to others” , , cert.
State v. D'Ambrosio 750 P.2d 8 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
State v. D'Ambrosio 750 P.2d 8 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
State v. Stone 728 P.2d 674 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
State v. Stone 728 P.2d 674 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
our supreme court declared that the standard of effective assistance of counsel for cases pending on appeal as of January 9, 1985, , cert.
State v. Jorbin 728 P.2d 1246 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
State v. Jorbin 728 P.2d 1246 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984); , , cert.
State v. Caperon 728 P.2d 296 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
State v. Caperon 728 P.2d 296 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
State v. Castaneda 724 P.2d 1 Ariz. 1986
State v. Castaneda 724 P.2d 1 Ariz. 1986
In doing so, we must then determine “whether the sentences of death are excessive or disproportionate to the penalty imposed by this court in similar cases ...” , ( , , cert.
State v. Schrock 719 P.2d 1049 Ariz. 1986
State v. Schrock 719 P.2d 1049 Ariz. 1986
The issue, therefore, is whether defendant stated a , , cert.
State v. Mount 719 P.2d 280 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
State v. Mount 719 P.2d 280 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
State v. Bush 714 P.2d 818 Ariz. 1986
State v. Bush 714 P.2d 818 Ariz. 1986
2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984); , cert.
State v. Correll 715 P.2d 721 Ariz. 1986
State v. Correll 715 P.2d 721 Ariz. 1986
We continue to believe that our statute provides constitutionally acceptable standards for deciding whether aggravating circumstances outweigh mitigating factors.” , (citation omitted).
State v. Hackworth 716 P.2d 1047 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1985
State v. Hackworth 716 P.2d 1047 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1985
State v. Anderson 710 P.2d 456 Ariz. 1985
State v. Anderson 710 P.2d 456 Ariz. 1985
State v. Johnson 710 P.2d 1050 Ariz. 1985
State v. Johnson 710 P.2d 1050 Ariz. 1985
-61 , -34 (1983); , cert.
State v. Lucas 708 P.2d 81 Ariz. 1985
State v. Lucas 708 P.2d 81 Ariz. 1985
State v. Rossi 706 P.2d 371 Ariz. 1985
State v. Rossi 706 P.2d 371 Ariz. 1985
State v. Smith 707 P.2d 289 Ariz. 1985
State v. Smith 707 P.2d 289 Ariz. 1985
State v. Borbon 706 P.2d 718 Ariz. 1985
State v. Borbon 706 P.2d 718 Ariz. 1985
State v. Bracy 703 P.2d 464 Ariz. 1985
State v. Bracy 703 P.2d 464 Ariz. 1985
State v. Poehnelt 722 P.2d 304 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1985
State v. Poehnelt 722 P.2d 304 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1985
State v. Belcher 706 P.2d 392 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1985
State v. Belcher 706 P.2d 392 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1985
which states the test for ineffective assistance of counsel.
State v. Gerlaugh 698 P.2d 694 Ariz. 1985
State v. Gerlaugh 698 P.2d 694 Ariz. 1985
2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984), we have recently modified the first prong to require “deficient representation.”
State v. Poland 698 P.2d 207 Ariz. 1985
State v. Poland 698 P.2d 183 Ariz. 1985