Cited by
Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Burton, 697 P.2d 331.
- State v. Marquez-Sosa 779 P.2d 815 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
- State v. Marquez-Sosa 779 P.2d 815 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
- State v. MacGillivray 785 P.2d 59 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
-
State v. MacGillivray
785 P.2d 59
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
(fundamental error goes to foundation of case or takes from defendant a right essential to his defense.)
- State v. Flores 772 P.2d 589 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
- State v. Flores 772 P.2d 589 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
- Andrews v. Fry's Food Stores of Arizona 770 P.2d 397 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1989
- Andrews v. Fry's Food Stores of Arizona 770 P.2d 397 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1989
- State v. Weaver 762 P.2d 1361 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
- State v. Weaver 762 P.2d 1361 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
- State v. Olsen 760 P.2d 603 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
- State v. Olsen 760 P.2d 603 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
- State v. Bloomer 751 P.2d 592 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1987
- State v. Bloomer 751 P.2d 592 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1987
- State v. Holder 745 P.2d 141 Ariz. 1987
- State v. Holder 745 P.2d 141 Ariz. 1987
- State v. Holder 745 P.2d 138 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
-
State v. Holder
745 P.2d 138
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
12] Although it is settled that, absent fundamental error, objection for the first time on appeal is generally waived, , we think it would be unfair to suggest that any attorney, or a defendant representing himself, should have been aware of the grounds for objecting to the exercise of peremptory challenges to exclude members of a minority race from a jury panel in light of the holdings in State v. Wiley
- State v. Lindsey 720 P.2d 73 Ariz. 1986
-
State v. Lindsey
720 P.2d 73
Ariz. 1986
However, when a motion to preclude “is made and ruled upon, the objection raised in that motion is preserved for appeal, despite the absence of a specific objection at trial.”