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. Plew, 722 P.2d 243.

31 citing documents.

  • State v. Lampe Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
  • State v. Lampe Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
    See Carson, 243 Ariz. at 468, ¶¶ 22-24 (self-defense); (same), abrogated on other grounds by Carson, 243 Ariz. at 465-66, ¶¶ 10-11; (defense of a third person).
  • State v. Lowery Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
  • State v. Lowery Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
    Decision of the Court claims, but it allowed him to proceed with further briefing on his claim that Carson was a significant change in the law.1 ¶5 When Lowery was tried, courts “consistently prohibited a defendant from simultaneously claiming self-defense and asserting a misidentification defense.” Carson, 243 Ariz. at 464, ¶ 1; see, (“A defendant who denies shooting the victim may not thereafter claim self-defense.”).
  • State v. Medina 418 P.3d 1134 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2018
  • State v. Medina 418 P.3d 1134 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2018
    ¶ 12 While we acknowledge that a defendant's testimony is sufficient to raise the issue of self-defense, State v. Plew , , 77, , 245 (1986), disapproved of on other grounds by State v. King , , ¶¶ 9-12, , 242-43 (2010), and that the "slightest evidence" is all that is needed to support a justification defense, see State v. Carson , , ¶ 18, , 1234 (2018), a defendant must
  • State of Arizona v. Antajuan Stewart Carson Jr. 410 P.3d 1230 Ariz. 2018
  • State of Arizona v. Antajuan Stewart Carson Jr. 410 P.3d 1230 Ariz. 2018
    See, (“A defendant who denies shooting the victim may not thereafter claim self-defense,”); (“[S]imple logic demands that a ‘defendant who disclaims any assaultive behavior on his part is not entitled to a self defense instruction.’” (quoting State v. Miller, 129 Ariz
  • State v. Carson 391 P.3d 1198 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2017
  • State v. Carson 391 P.3d 1198 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2017
    (instruction required because defendant presented slightest evidence of self-defense, although record was “ambigu[ous]” and in conflict), disapproved on other grounds by King, ¶¶ 9-12 , 235 P.3d at 242-43 ; -86 , -37 (Ap
  • State of Arizona v. Ronald Vassell 359 P.3d 1025 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2015
  • State of Arizona v. Ronald Vassell 359 P.3d 1025 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2015
  • State of Arizona v. Andy Daniel Almeida 356 P.3d 822 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2015
  • State of Arizona v. Andy Daniel Almeida 356 P.3d 822 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2015
    ¶ 14; disapproved on other grounds by King, ¶¶ 9, 12, 235 P.3d at 242, 243; (instruction required “if the evidence in the slightest degree tends to” show justification).
  • State v. King 235 P.3d 240 Ariz. 2010
  • State v. King 235 P.3d 240 Ariz. 2010
    See, Dumaine, 162 Ariz. at 404, 783 P.2d at 1196; P.2d 754 (1990).
  • State of Arizona v. Renee Sue Ruggiero Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2005
  • State of Arizona v. Renee Sue Ruggiero Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2005
    In her reply brief, P.2d 1035 (App. 1989), P.2d 243 (1986), for the proposition that she could deny having killed D. and still have been entitled to a justification instruction.
  • State v. Rodriguez 961 P.2d 1006 Ariz. 1998
  • State v. Rodriguez 961 P.2d 1006 Ariz. 1998
    175 , 486 A.2d 196, 199 (1985) (alibi sufficiently raised though evidence of alibi was limited to defendant’s uncorroborated testimony); -78 , -46 (1986) (self-defense instruction required even though evidence of self-defensive action was limited to defendant’s uncorroborated testimony).
  • State v. Korzep 799 P.2d 831 Ariz. 1990
  • State v. Korzep 799 P.2d 831 Ariz. 1990
    A criminal defendant is entitled to have the jury instructed on self defense “whenever there is the slightest evidence of justification for the defensive act.” , ( , )
  • State v. Schaefer 790 P.2d 281 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
  • State v. Soule 791 P.2d 1048 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
  • State v. Soule 791 P.2d 1048 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
    (defendant entitled to a self defense instruction even though he denied shooting the victim).
  • State v. Wright 786 P.2d 1035 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
  • State v. Wright 786 P.2d 1035 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
    The defendant is entitled to such an instruction “whenever there is the slightest evidence of justification for the defensive act.”
  • 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. Plew 745 P.2d 102 Ariz. 1987
  • State v. Plew 745 P.2d 102 Ariz. 1987
    because the trial judge had incorrectly refused to instruct the jury on self-defense.