Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Fierroa, 804 P.2d 72.

143 citing documents.

State v. Randles Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Randles Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
5 STATE v. RANDLES Decision of the Court (witness’ description of the defendant was sufficient because it was substantially correct although not entirely accurate).
State v. Ricci Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
State v. Ricci Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
“Even if a pretrial viewing is found to be suggestive, a subsequent in-court identification is admissible if it can be shown to be otherwise reliable.”
State v. Fierro Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State v. Fierro Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State of Arizona v. Sergio Arturo Rojo-Valenzuela 352 P.3d 917 Ariz. 2015
State of Arizona v. Sergio Arturo Rojo-Valenzuela 352 P.3d 917 Ariz. 2015
–47, –80 (1990) (relying in part on extensive cross-examination of identifying witness instead of exclusively on enumerated Biggers factors).
State v. Najar Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Najar Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State of Arizona v. Sergio Arturo Rojo-Valenzuela 334 P.3d 1276 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
State of Arizona v. Sergio Arturo Rojo-Valenzuela 334 P.3d 1276 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
-47, -80 (1990) (relying in part on extensive cross-examination of witness); (noting Biggers factors are “not exclusive”).
State of Arizona v. Ronnie Lovelle Joseph 283 P.3d 27 Ariz. 2012
State of Arizona v. Ronnie Lovelle Joseph 283 P.3d 27 Ariz. 2012
State v. Pete J. Vanwinkle 285 P.3d 308 Ariz. 2012
State v. Pete J. Vanwinkle 285 P.3d 308 Ariz. 2012
State v. Delahanty 250 P.3d 1131 Ariz. 2011
State v. Delahanty 250 P.3d 1131 Ariz. 2011
State v. Kiles 213 P.3d 174 Ariz. 2009
State v. Kiles 213 P.3d 174 Ariz. 2009
State v. Speer 212 P.3d 787 Ariz. 2009
State v. Speer 212 P.3d 787 Ariz. 2009
¶56 In contrast, P.2d 72 (1990), we found knowledge established.
State v. Bearup 211 P.3d 684 Ariz. 2009
State v. Bearup 211 P.3d 684 Ariz. 2009
State v. Harrod 183 P.3d 519 Ariz. 2008
State v. Harrod 183 P.3d 519 Ariz. 2008
This claim has been rejected by State v. 35 Gulbrandson
State v. Velazquez 166 P.3d 91 Ariz. 2007
State v. Velazquez 166 P.3d 91 Ariz. 2007
State v. Garza 163 P.3d 1006 Ariz. 2007
State v. Garza 163 P.3d 1006 Ariz. 2007
State v. Smith 159 P.3d 531 Ariz. 2007
State of Arizona v. Ramon Anthony Joyner Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
State of Arizona v. Ramon Anthony Joyner Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
Schaaf, 169 Ariz. at 333-34, 819 P.2d at 919-20 (Nevada’s statutory elements for attempted murder did not require use of violence; trial court erred in considering testimony about underlying facts), (Texas convictions for aggravated assault and robbery did not support § 13-703(F)(2) aggravator because offenses could be committed “recklessly” without use or threat of force) (citations omitted in Schaaf); (prior
State v. Smith 159 P.3d 531 Ariz. 2007
(“If, under the statutory definition of the crime, the defendant could commit or be convicted of the crime without the use or 4 The legislature has since foreclosed this argument by amending A.R.S.
State v. Roque 141 P.3d 368 Ariz. 2006
State v. Roque 141 P.3d 368 Ariz. 2006
State v. Fierro, 166 Ariz. 539, 550
State v. Ellison 140 P.3d 899 Ariz. 2006
State v. Ellison 140 P.3d 899 Ariz. 2006
State v. Johnson 133 P.3d 735 Ariz. 2006
State v. Johnson 133 P.3d 735 Ariz. 2006
(finding that wife confined to 10 feet by 10 feet courtyard with the defendant as he stabbed her husband was in grave risk of death; she attempted to rescue her husband by jumping on the defendant’s back as he was stabbing her husband); (finding victim’s girlfriend was in zone of danger when defendant fired several shots at victim, striking him once and narrowly missing his girlfriend whom the defendant knew was seated nearby).
State v. Anderson 111 P.3d 369 Ariz. 2005
State v. Anderson 111 P.3d 369 Ariz. 2005
State v. Hoskins 14 P.3d 997 Ariz. 2000
State v. Hoskins 14 P.3d 997 Ariz. 2000
(witness encounter of six minutes with defendant was adequate to establish reliability of witness’ identification of defendant).
State v. Van Adams 984 P.2d 16 Ariz. 1999
State v. Van Adams 984 P.2d 16 Ariz. 1999
See Gulbrandson, 184 Ariz. at 69 , 906 P.2d at 602
State v. White 982 P.2d 819 Ariz. 1999
State v. Smith 974 P.2d 431 Ariz. 1999
State v. Smith 974 P.2d 431 Ariz. 1999
State v. Sharp 973 P.2d 1171 Ariz. 1999