Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Henderson, 115 P.3d 601.

1723 citing documents.

State v. Valles Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Valles Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Jordan Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
¶ 20 (2005) (requiring defendant to establish error and prejudice in fundamental error review).
State v. Wheeler Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Wheeler Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Therefore, the Administrative Order did not apply to the issued bench warrant, id., and the assessment of the warrant fee constitutes fundamental error, ¶ 19 (2005) (explaining that when a defendant fails to object to an error, this court reviews for fundamental error); Soria, 217 Ariz. at 102-03, ¶¶ 4, 7 (“[I]mposition of an illegal sentence constitutes fundamental error.”).
State v. Porter Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Franklin Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Porter Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
¶¶ 19-20 (2005) (explaining fundamental error is error that both goes to the foundation of the case and prejudices the defendant).
State v. Franklin Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Zamora Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Zamora Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Sotelo-Nava Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Green Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Green Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Sotelo-Nava Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
¶ 19 (2005) (explaining that failure to object to alleged trial error results in fundamental error review).
State v. Cruz Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Cruz Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. McCollum Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. McCollum Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Puente Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Puente Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State of Arizona v. Bryan Wayne Hulsey Ariz. 2018
State of Arizona v. Bryan Wayne Hulsey Ariz. 2018
State v. Padilla Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Padilla Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Weber Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Weber Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Risner Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Risner Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Boozer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Boozer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
¶ 18 5 STATE V. BOOZER Decision of the Court (2005) (“Reviewing courts consider alleged trial error under the harmless error standard when a defendant objects at trial and thereby preserves the issue for appeal.”)
State v. Abbott Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Abbott Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
To establish fundamental error, the defendant has the burden to show error that “goes to the foundation of his case, takes away a right that is essential to his defense, and is of such magnitude that he could not have received a fair trial.” ¶ 24 (2005).
State v. Satzman Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Satzman Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Westerfield Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Westerfield Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Issa Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Issa Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State of Arizona v. Jasper Phillip Rushing Ariz. 2017
State of Arizona v. Jasper Phillip Rushing Ariz. 2017
b. Merits ¶16 “A fundamental error is error that goes to the foundation of the case, takes from the defendant a right that is essential to his defense, and is of such magnitude that the defendant could not possibly have received a fair trial.” ¶ 40 (2017) ( ¶ 19 (2005)).
State v. Griego Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Griego Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
In Re Francisco F. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
In Re Francisco F. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
¶¶ 19-20 (2005) (fundamental error is “error going to the foundation of the case, error that takes from the defendant a right essential to his defense, and error of such magnitude that the defendant could not possibly have received a fair trial”; to prevail under this standard, a defendant must establish both th
State v. Marquez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Marquez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Cutrara Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Cutrara Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Orona Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017