Cited by

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

1723 citing documents.

State v. Wilson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Tracy Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Moore Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Wilson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
¶ 22 (2005); ¶ 148 (2016).
State v. Taylor Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Taylor Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Cox Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Cox Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
¶ 19 (2005) (citations omitted).
State of Arizona v. Donald Wayne Dalton 385 P.3d 412 Ariz. 2016
State of Arizona v. Donald Wayne Dalton 385 P.3d 412 Ariz. 2016
Such errors are very limited in nature and number inasmuch as they “affect the entire conduct of the trial from beginning to end, and thus taint the framework within which the trial proceeds.” ¶ 12, (internal quotation marks omitted) ( ¶ 22, ).
State v. Juarez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Juarez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Alvarado Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Curiel-Rodriguez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Curiel-Rodriguez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Alvarado Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
¶ 19, (holding that an issue not raised below is reviewed for fundamental error).
State v. Vallejos Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Vallejos Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
¶ 19 (2005) (citation omitted).
Pedro R. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Coffelt Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Coffelt Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
¶ 19 (2005) (citation omitted).
Pedro R. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
-68, ¶¶ 19-20, -08 (2005) (fundamental error applies when a party fails to object to alleged trial error; to establish fundamental error, a party must establish both that error exists and that the error caused that party prejudice).
State of Arizona v. Earl Jefferson Causbie 384 P.3d 1253 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
State of Arizona v. Earl Jefferson Causbie 384 P.3d 1253 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
State v. Koley Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Koley Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Gurrieri Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Gurrieri Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State of Arizona v. Craig Victor Coleman 385 P.3d 420 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
State v. Devorce Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Devorce Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
¶ 19 (2005) (citation omitted).
State of Arizona v. Craig Victor Coleman 385 P.3d 420 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
¶6 Coleman raised his equal protection argument below, thus preserving it for review, but forfeited any review of whether his substantive due process rights have been violated except for fundamental, prejudicial error.1 (“objection on one ground does not preserve the issue on another ground”).
State v. Self Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Self Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
¶ 19 (2005) (holding fundamental error review “applies when a defendant fails to object to alleged trial error”).
State v. Lomeli Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Lomeli Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Stewart Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Stewart Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Because Stewart failed to preserve the issue, ¶ 18 (2005) (holding objection at first trial does not preserve error for appellate review of second trial), we review only for fundamental, prejudicial error, ¶¶ 19- 20 (2005).
In Re J.U. 384 P.3d 839 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
In Re J.U. 384 P.3d 839 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
State v. Bucholtz Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Izquerdo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Izquerdo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Bucholtz Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State of Arizona v. Manuel Fernando Florez 384 P.3d 335 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
State v. Connatser Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State of Arizona v. Manuel Fernando Florez 384 P.3d 335 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
State v. Connatser Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Deshaies Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Deshaies Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016