Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Moore, 213 P.3d 150.

116 citing documents.

State of Arizona v. Rodney Eugene Hardy 283 P.3d 12 Ariz. 2012
State of Arizona v. Rodney Eugene Hardy 283 P.3d 12 Ariz. 2012
¶¶ 6-9, 12 ¶ 49, 161 (2009).
State v. Pete J. Vanwinkle 285 P.3d 308 Ariz. 2012
State v. Pete J. Vanwinkle 285 P.3d 308 Ariz. 2012
See State v. Moore, 222 Ariz. 1, 16 ¶ 85
State of Arizona v. Scott Douglas Nordstrom 280 P.3d 1244 Ariz. 2012
State of Arizona v. Scott Douglas Nordstrom 280 P.3d 1244 Ariz. 2012
“[A] defendant has no constitutional right to present residual doubt evidence at sentencing.” ¶ 109, see also State v. Harrod (Harrod III), ¶ 46
State v. Prince 250 P.3d 1145 Ariz. 2011
State v. Prince 250 P.3d 1145 Ariz. 2011
¶ 90, 3 ¶22 Prince nonetheless argues that the final penalty-phase jury in a trifurcated proceeding might not have heard all of the relevant circumstances of the crime.
State v. Gallardo 242 P.3d 159 Ariz. 2010
State v. Gallardo 242 P.3d 159 Ariz. 2010
State v. Don Chappell 236 P.3d 1176 Ariz. 2010
State v. Don Chappell 236 P.3d 1176 Ariz. 2010
State v. Garcia 226 P.3d 370 Ariz. 2010
State v. Garcia 226 P.3d 370 Ariz. 2010
State v. KUHS 224 P.3d 192 Ariz. 2010
State v. KUHS 224 P.3d 192 Ariz. 2010