Cited by

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

1743 citing documents.

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
State v. Orona Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
¶ 19 (2005) ("[W]e place the burden of persuasion in fundamental error review on the defendant.").
State v. Eaton Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Eaton Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Hunter Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
In Re Ms2015-000003 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
In Re Ms2015-000003 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Hunter Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Bithell Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Daniels Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Bithell Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Daniels Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Garcia Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Garcia Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
¶ 22 (2005); (holding that an objection on one ground does not preserve an issue on another ground).
State v. Toddy Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Toddy Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Carr Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Carr Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Molinar Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Molinar Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
¶ 22; (objection on one ground does not preserve objection on another ground).
State v. Taylor Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Taylor Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
¶ 20 (2005); ¶ 20 (2007) (reviewing a defendant’s challenges to the voir dire process, raised for the first time on appeal, for fundamental error).
State v. Hamilton Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Hamilton Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Spriggs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Spriggs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
¶ 19 (2005) (citation omitted).
State v. Nichols Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Nichols Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Viliborghi Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Viliborghi Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Billups Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017