Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Newell, 132 P.3d 833.

558 citing documents.

State v. Lincourt Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Rusagara Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Rusagara Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Cisneros Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Cisneros Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Wadi Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Wadi Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Lewis Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Lewis Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
2 Because the evidence regarding the second burglary was admissible to prove Lewis’s identity in connection with the first offense, ¶¶ 16-18 (2002), ¶ 46 (2015), he cannot s
State v. Oviedo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Koryor Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Johnson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Johnson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Koryor Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
¶ 43 (2017) ( ¶ 68 (2006), ¶ 50 (2005)).
State v. Oviedo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
¶ 54 (2006) ("The first step of the Batson analysis is complete when the trial court requests an explanation for the peremptory strike.").
State v. Martinez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Martinez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Marquez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Marquez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Kavu Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Kavu Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
¶ 51 (2006) (citing Batson, 476 U.S. at 89).
State v. Jones Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Jones Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Bryant Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Bryant Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Garnica Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Garnica Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Although we review the court's legal decisions de novo, id., we will not reverse a ruling on a motion to suppress absent abuse of discretion, ¶ 22, n.6 (2006).
State v. Terry Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Terry Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
¶ 61 (2006) (citation omitted).
State v. Muldrow Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Muldrow Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Murray Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Murray Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
“It is not until the third step that the persuasiveness of the justification becomes relevant.” ¶ 54 (2006) (quoting Purkett v. Elem, 514 U.S. 765, 768 (1995)).
State v. Marquez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Marquez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
¶13 To prevail on a claim of prosecutorial misconduct, the “defendant must show that the offending statements [or conduct], in the context of the entire proceeding, so infected the trial with unfairness as to make the resulting conviction a denial of due process.” ¶ 60 (2006) (internal quotation omitted).
State of Arizona v. James Erin McKinney 426 P.3d 1204 Ariz. 2018
State of Arizona v. James Erin McKinney 426 P.3d 1204 Ariz. 2018
¶ 82 (2006); see also Eddings v. Oklahoma, 455 U.S. 104, 112 (1982) (requiring sentencer to consider all relevant mitigating evidence).
State of Arizona v. Jose Alejandro Acuna Valenzuela 426 P.3d 1176 Ariz. 2018
State of Arizona v. Jose Alejandro Acuna Valenzuela 426 P.3d 1176 Ariz. 2018
e real harm defendant [Acuna] caused,” concluding that, “when you focus on the real evidence and the real events and you avoid the distractions, I submit to you that the entirety of the evidence in this case will leave you firmly convinced of the defendant’s guilt.” The presumption that jurors follow a court’s instructions that lawyers’ statements are not evidence, ¶ 68 (2006), eradicates a slight possibility of any taint from vouching when the 22 STATE v. ACUNA VALENZUELA Opinion of the Court s
State of Arizona v. Dauntorian Lydel Sanders 425 P.3d 1056 Ariz. 2018
State of Arizona v. Dauntorian Lydel Sanders 425 P.3d 1056 Ariz. 2018
¶ 82 (2006) (“We do not require that a nexus between the mitigating factors and the crime be established before we consider the mitigation evidence.” (citing Tennard v. Dretke, 542 U.S. 274, 287 (2004))).
State v. Barnes Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Barnes Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Adair Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Adair Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
¶¶ 47-48 (2006) (“‘[G]et[ting] right with God,’ confessing sins, and asking for forgiveness .
State v. Malone 425 P.3d 592 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2018
State v. Malone 425 P.3d 592 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2018
State v. Newell , , ¶ 60
State v. Winiker Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Galvez-Galvez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Phillips Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018