Cited by
Opinions in Arizona that cite State of Arizona v. Andre Michael Leteve, 354 P.3d 393.
-
State of Arizona v. Edward Littleton McCauley
Ariz. 2026
Thus, the state may ‘rebut’ mitigation—that is, a conclusion that the defendant should be shown leniency—by introducing evidence of the ‘specific harm caused by the defendant.’” –29 ¶ 47 (2015) (internal citations omitted) ( ¶ 126 (2014)).
- State v. Johnson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
-
State v. Johnson
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
¶ 25 (2015) (quoting Sullivan v. Louisiana, 508 U.S. 275, 279 (1993)).
- State v. L & L Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
- State v. L & L Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
- State of Arizona v. Adriel Guevara-Enriquez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2025
-
State of Arizona v. Adriel Guevara-Enriquez
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2025
“In deciding whether error is harmless, the question ‘is not whether, in a trial that occurred without the error, a guilty verdict would surely have been rendered, but whether the guilty verdict actually rendered in this trial was surely unattributable to the error.’” (quoting Sullivan v. Louisiana, 508 U.S. 275, 279 (1993)).
- State of Arizona v. Albert F. Vergara Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2025
-
State of Arizona v. Albert F. Vergara
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2025
401; (“The threshold for relevance is a low one.”).
- State v. Lampe Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
-
State v. Lampe
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
The key inquiry in determining if an error is harmless is “whether the guilty verdict actually rendered in this trial was surely unattributable to the error.” ¶ 25 (2015) (quoting Sullivan v. Louisiana, 508 U.S. 275, 279 (1993)).
- State of Arizona v. Preston Alton Strong 555 P.3d 537 Ariz. 2024
- State of Arizona v. Preston Alton Strong 555 P.3d 537 Ariz. 2024
- State of Arizona v. Timothy Andrew Parkinson 554 P.3d 1 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2024
-
State of Arizona v. Timothy Andrew Parkinson
554 P.3d 1
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2024
See, (in deciding harmlessness, question is whether guilty verdict actually rendered was surely unattributable to identified trial error).
- State of Arizona v. Adam Douglas Haywood 550 P.3d 610 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2024
-
State of Arizona v. Adam Douglas Haywood
550 P.3d 610
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2024
(quoting Sullivan v. Louisiana, 508 U.S. 275, 279 (1993)).
- State v. Sandoval Beltran Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
-
State v. Sandoval Beltran
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
¶ 9 (2015) (citing New York v. Quarles, 467 U.S. 649, 659 (1984)).
- State v. Rohrer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
- State v. Rohrer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
- State of Arizona v. Andres Sanchez 537 P.3d 794 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2023
- State of Arizona v. Andres Sanchez 537 P.3d 794 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2023
- Carlos Cruz v. Hon. blair/state of Arizona 532 P.3d 327 Ariz. 2023
-
Carlos Cruz v. Hon. blair/state of Arizona
532 P.3d 327
Ariz. 2023
BLAIR/STATE Opinion of the Court ¶17 We have continually reaffirmed that “[t]he legislature has not provided for, and this Court has refused to allow, an affirmative defense of diminished capacity.” ¶ 20 (2015); 212–13 (1965) (considering and rejecting defense of diminished capacity and noting the legislature “has not recognized a disease or defect of mind in which volition does not exist .
- State v. Gilbert Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
-
State v. Gilbert
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
“A declaration of a mistrial is the most dramatic remedy for trial error and should be granted only when it appears that justice will be thwarted unless the jury is discharged and a new trial granted.” ¶ 33 (2015) (citation omitted).
- State v. Mallotte Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
- State v. Mallotte Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
- State of Arizona v. Dwandarrius Jamar Robinson 509 P.3d 1023 Ariz. 2022
-
State of Arizona v. Dwandarrius Jamar Robinson
509 P.3d 1023
Ariz. 2022
“The killing of a child satisfies the senselessness and helplessness factors.” ¶ 36 (2015).
- State of Arizona v. James Murray Reaves, III 506 P.3d 39 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2022
- State of Arizona v. James Murray Reaves, III 506 P.3d 39 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2022
- State of Arizona v. Richard Allen Reed 502 P.3d 979 Ariz. 2022
-
State of Arizona v. Richard Allen Reed
502 P.3d 979
Ariz. 2022
¶ 58 (2015) ( ¶¶ 2, 5 (App. 2009)).
- State v. Castillo-Cervantes Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
- State v. Castillo-Cervantes Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
- State v. Rothrock Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
-
State v. Rothrock
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
to kill himself.” ¶ 21 (2015) (“‘[C]apacity evidence’ which concerns a defendant’s ‘capacity to form mens rea,’ .
- State v. Jones Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
- State v. Jones Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
- State v. Qureshi Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
- State v. Qureshi Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
- State of Arizona v. Allyn Akeem Smith 475 P.3d 558 Ariz. 2020
-
State of Arizona v. Allyn Akeem Smith
475 P.3d 558
Ariz. 2020
“The threshold for relevance is a low one.” ¶ 48 (2015) (quoting Roque, 213 Ariz. at 221 ¶ 109).
- State v. Reed 483 P.3d 221 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
- State v. Reed 483 P.3d 221 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
- State v. Womble Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
- State v. Womble Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
- State v. Zuleger Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020