Cited by

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

1743 citing documents.

State v. Rivera Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Cardona Rodriguez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Cardona Rodriguez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
-69, ¶¶ 19-26, -09 (2005); see also Ariz. R. Crim.
State v. Cortez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Fingi Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Fingi Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
This court must therefore review his argument under a fundamental error standard, with Fingi bearing “the burden of establishing both that fundamental error occurred and that the error caused him prejudice.” ¶ 22
State v. Cortez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
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.” ¶ 19, ( ).
State v. Giron Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Wiggs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Valenzuela Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Wiggs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Valenzuela Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
–68, ¶¶ 19–20, –08 (2005); ¶ 11
State v. Giron Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
-68, ¶¶ 20-22, -08 (2005).
State v. Sasek Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Fouch Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Sasek Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
–68, ¶¶ 19–20, –08 (2005).
State v. Fouch Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Sanchez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Sanchez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
¶ 19, (“[A]n objection to the admission of evidence on one ground will not preserve issues relating to the admission of that evidence on other grounds.”).
State v. Cotham Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Cotham Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
P. 21.3(c); –68 ¶¶ 19–20, –08 (2005).
State of Arizona v. Johnathan Ian Burns 344 P.3d 303 Ariz. 2015
State v. Patton Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State of Arizona v. Johnathan Ian Burns 344 P.3d 303 Ariz. 2015
¶ 18, (“Harmless error review places the burden on the state to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the error did not contribute to or affect the verdict or sentence.”).
State v. Patton Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
–68, ¶¶ 19–20, –08 (2005).
State v. Dagenais Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Garcia-Meza Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Garcia-Meza Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
-68, ¶¶ 20-22, -08 (2005).
State v. Dagenais Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Enriquez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Enriquez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Multari Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Multari Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Ocamb Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Ocamb Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
¶ 19, (stating fundamental error review applies when defendant fails to object to alleged trial error); Ariz. R. Crim.
State v. Young Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Young Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
-68, ¶¶ 20-22, -08 (2005) (defendant bears burden of establishing both fundamental error occurrence and resulting prejudice).
State v. Recchia Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Butler Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Recchia Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Butler Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
¶¶ 19-20, see also McDonald, 117 Ariz. at 161, 571 2 Brandon Chapple and Isiah Buck did not appeal their convictions or sentences.
State v. Kummer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Kummer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State of Arizona v. Jose Raul Juarez-Orci 342 P.3d 856 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2015
State of Arizona v. Jose Raul Juarez-Orci 342 P.3d 856 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2015
P. 21.3(c); ¶¶ 19–20, (untimely objection first raised in motion for new trial does not preserve issue for appeal).
State of Arizona v. Francisco Xavier Veloz 342 P.3d 1272 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2015
State v. Veseli Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State of Arizona v. Francisco Xavier Veloz 342 P.3d 1272 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2015
6 Theft is not always “lesser” than organized retail theft, because theft of more than $3,000 in property or services can be a class four felony, and $25,000 or more is a class three felony; organized retail theft is a class four felony reg
State v. Veseli Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Trotter Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015