DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

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

143 citing documents.

  • State v. Ramirez 871 P.2d 237 Ariz. 1994
  • State v. Ramirez 871 P.2d 237 Ariz. 1994
    Accordingly, “[i]f, under the statutory definition, the defendant could have committed and been convicted of the crime without using or threatening violence, the prior conviction may not qualify as a statutory aggravating circumstance under § 13-703(F)(2).” Romanosky, 162 Ariz. at 228 , 782 P.2d at 704
  • State v. Gallegos 870 P.2d 1097 Ariz. 1994
  • State v. Gallegos 870 P.2d 1097 Ariz. 1994
  • State v. Milke 865 P.2d 779 Ariz. 1993
  • State v. Milke 865 P.2d 779 Ariz. 1993
  • State v. Stuard 863 P.2d 881 Ariz. 1993
  • State v. Stuard 863 P.2d 881 Ariz. 1993
  • State v. Henry 863 P.2d 861 Ariz. 1993
  • State v. Henry 863 P.2d 861 Ariz. 1993
  • State v. Michael Apelt 861 P.2d 634 Ariz. 1993
  • State v. Michael Apelt 861 P.2d 634 Ariz. 1993
    1589 , 113 L.Ed.2d 653 (1991); , (absent a showing to the contrary, we presume the trial court considered only relevant information and disregarded anything irrelevant or inflammatory).
  • State v. West 862 P.2d 192 Ariz. 1993
  • State v. West 862 P.2d 192 Ariz. 1993
  • State v. Lopez 857 P.2d 1261 Ariz. 1993
  • State v. Lopez 857 P.2d 1261 Ariz. 1993
    (court deferred to trial judge’s determination that the evidence was insufficient to establish that the defendant’s intoxication impaired his ability to appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of law, because the determination was based on
  • State v. Bible 858 P.2d 1152 Ariz. 1993
  • Overruled State v. Bible 858 P.2d 1152 Ariz. 1993
    “If, under the statutory definition of the crime, the defendant could commit or be convicted of the crime without the use or threat of violence, the prior conviction cannot qualify as a statutory aggravating circumstance.” , accord Schaaf, 169 Ariz. at 333, 819 P.2d at 919 .
  • State v. Schackart 858 P.2d 639 Ariz. 1993
  • State v. Schackart 858 P.2d 639 Ariz. 1993
    (supreme court must independently review death sentence).
  • State v. Armstrong 862 P.2d 230 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
  • State v. Armstrong 862 P.2d 230 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
    (“Before evidence of a prior bad act can be admitted, there must be proof sufficient to take the case [for that bad act] to a jury.”).
  • State v. Kiles 857 P.2d 1212 Ariz. 1993
  • State v. Kiles 857 P.2d 1212 Ariz. 1993
    Defendant argues that his prior convictions do not qualify in light of this court’s , that, under the statutory definition of aggravated assault, it is possible to commit aggravated assault without the use or threat of violence.
  • State v. Herrera, Jr. 859 P.2d 131 Ariz. 1993
  • State v. Herrera 850 P.2d 100 Ariz. 1993
  • State v. Herrera, Jr. 859 P.2d 131 Ariz. 1993
  • State v. Herrera 850 P.2d 100 Ariz. 1993
    Although the trial court must consider all evidence offered by the defendant in mitigation, “it is within the discretion of the trial judge how much weight should be given to the proffered mitigating factors.” , citing Jeffers v. Ricketts, 627 F.Supp.
  • State v. Landrigan 859 P.2d 111 Ariz. 1993
  • State v. Landrigan 859 P.2d 111 Ariz. 1993
    (“We will not uphold imposition of the death penalty unless either the murder or the defendant differs from the norm of first degree murders or defendants”).
  • State v. Salazar 844 P.2d 566 Ariz. 1992
  • State v. Salazar 844 P.2d 566 Ariz. 1992
  • State v. Atwood 832 P.2d 593 Ariz. 1992
  • State v. Atwood 832 P.2d 593 Ariz. 1992
    than death might be appropriate,” , but “it is within the discretion of the trial judge how much weight should be given to the proffered mitigating factors.” , citing Jeffers v. Ricketts, 627 F.Supp.
  • State v. Brewer 826 P.2d 783 Ariz. 1992
  • State v. Brewer 826 P.2d 783 Ariz. 1992
    (court could remand case because the trial court erred with respect to one of three aggravating factors).
  • State v. Cook 821 P.2d 731 Ariz. 1991
  • State v. Cook 821 P.2d 731 Ariz. 1991
  • State v. Greenway 823 P.2d 22 Ariz. 1991
  • State v. Greenway 823 P.2d 22 Ariz. 1991
    (defendant did not present evidence of bias or prejudice due to trial judge’s reading the presentence report prior to sentencing); -30 , -76 (1989), cert.
  • State v. Schaaf 819 P.2d 909 Ariz. 1991
  • State v. Schaaf 819 P.2d 909 Ariz. 1991
  • State v. White 815 P.2d 869 Ariz. 1991