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. King, 182 P.2d 915.

68 citing documents.

  • State v. Saenz 353 P.2d 1026 Ariz. 1960
  • State v. Saenz 353 P.2d 1026 Ariz. 1960
    Rule 270, Rules of Criminal Procedure.
  • State v. Holden 352 P.2d 705 Ariz. 1960
  • State v. Holden 352 P.2d 705 Ariz. 1960
  • State v. Merryman 283 P.2d 239 Ariz. 1955
  • State v. Merryman 283 P.2d 239 Ariz. 1955
    wherein the court said: “ ‘If, at the close of the evidence for the state or at close of all the evidence in the cause, the court is of the opinion that the evidence is insufficint (insufficient) to warrant a conviction, it may, and on the motion of the defendant shall, direct the jury to acquit
  • State v. Lane 233 P.2d 437 Ariz. 1951
  • State v. Lane 233 P.2d 437 Ariz. 1951
    that due to the human equation no case was ever so perfectly tried that it could not be subject to some criticism.
  • State v. Thorp 216 P.2d 415 Ariz. 1950
  • State v. Thorp 216 P.2d 415 Ariz. 1950
    The motion is denied.” , , we held that “no person is made ineligible or disqualified as a witness by virtue of the fact that his name is not endorsed on the information.” In that case it was pointed out that if a witness be called whose name is not indorsed on the information the defendant' cannot be heard to complain if
  • State v. Serna 211 P.2d 455 Ariz. 1949
  • State v. Serna 211 P.2d 455 Ariz. 1949
    919: “ * * * The purport and intention of these rules is to enable one accused of crime to prepare adequately and advisedly for his defense.
  • State v. Cassady 190 P.2d 501 Ariz. 1948
  • State v. Cassady 190 P.2d 501 Ariz. 1948
  • State v. Alexander 189 P.2d 455 Ariz. 1948
  • State v. Alexander 189 P.2d 455 Ariz. 1948
    222 P. 414 ; , 100 P. 462 .
  • State v. Singleton 182 P.2d 920 Ariz. 1947
  • State v. Singleton 182 P.2d 920 Ariz. 1947
    While we appreciate the fact that, due to the human equation, no case was ever so perfectly tried that it could not be subject to some criticism, , , still one accused of crime, particularly a man on trial for his life, is entitled to a fair and impartial trial which does not violate any of his substantial rights.