Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Salazar, 844 P.2d 566.

261 citing documents.

State v. Walden 905 P.2d 974 Ariz. 1995
State v. Walden 905 P.2d 974 Ariz. 1995
State v. Stokley 898 P.2d 454 Ariz. 1995
State v. Stokley 898 P.2d 454 Ariz. 1995
State v. Bolton 896 P.2d 830 Ariz. 1995
State v. Bolton 896 P.2d 830 Ariz. 1995
State v. Barr 904 P.2d 1258 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
State v. Barr 904 P.2d 1258 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
State v. Krum 893 P.2d 759 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
State v. Krum 893 P.2d 759 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
State v. Hinchey 890 P.2d 602 Ariz. 1995
State v. Hinchey 890 P.2d 602 Ariz. 1995
-17 , -84 (1992) (proportionality review not constitutionally required; court will no longer conduct them), cert.
State v. Olea 897 P.2d 1371 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
State v. Olea 897 P.2d 1371 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
State v. Ross 886 P.2d 1354 Ariz. 1994
State v. Ross 886 P.2d 1354 Ariz. 1994
(proportionality reviews discontinued in death penalty cases), cert.
In Re the Appeal in Maricopa County, Juvenile Action No. JV-506561 893 P.2d 60 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
In Re the Appeal in Maricopa County, Juvenile Action No. JV-506561 893 P.2d 60 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
State v. King 883 P.2d 1024 Ariz. 1994
State v. King 883 P.2d 1024 Ariz. 1994
(proportionality review not constitutionally required and court no longer conducts them).
Roosevelt Elementary School District Number 66 v. Bishop 877 P.2d 806 Ariz. 1994
State v. Gallegos 870 P.2d 1097 Ariz. 1994
State v. Gallegos 870 P.2d 1097 Ariz. 1994
Republic Insurance v. Feidler 875 P.2d 187 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
Republic Insurance v. Feidler 875 P.2d 187 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
-08 , -75 (1992) (alcohol intoxication is within jury’s knowledge and experience, and does not require expert testimony).
State v. Portillo 876 P.2d 1151 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
State v. Portillo 876 P.2d 1151 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
State v. Styers 865 P.2d 765 Ariz. 1993
State v. Styers 865 P.2d 765 Ariz. 1993
State v. Stuard 863 P.2d 881 Ariz. 1993
State v. Stuard 863 P.2d 881 Ariz. 1993
While this is true, it is well settled that Arizona law also requires this court to do justice in death cases, including if necessary, substituting its judgment for that of the trial judge, “something anathema in any other context.” , (1992), cert.
State v. Michael Apelt 861 P.2d 634 Ariz. 1993
State v. Rudi Apelt 861 P.2d 654 Ariz. 1993
State v. Rudi Apelt 861 P.2d 654 Ariz. 1993
(not appropriate for trial court to consider sentences imposed in other cases when sentencing defendant); , (defendant not entitled to proportionality review by appellate court), cert.
State v. Michael Apelt 861 P.2d 634 Ariz. 1993
(not appropriate for trial court to consider sentences imposed in other cases when sentencing defendant); , (defendant not entitled to proportionality review by appellate court), cert.
State v. West 862 P.2d 192 Ariz. 1993
State v. West 862 P.2d 192 Ariz. 1993
1492 , 71 L.Ed.2d 693 (1982), and we do not conduct proportionality reviews, , cert.
State v. Lopez 857 P.2d 1261 Ariz. 1993
State v. Lopez 857 P.2d 1261 Ariz. 1993
Finally, defendant contends that we should conduct a proportionality review, , cert.
State v. Bible 858 P.2d 1152 Ariz. 1993
State v. Bible 858 P.2d 1152 Ariz. 1993
cf. Mu’Min v. Virginia, — U.S. —, —, 111 S.Ct.
State v. Huerta 855 P.2d 776 Ariz. 1993
State v. Huerta 855 P.2d 776 Ariz. 1993
( , (Moeller, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part)).
Ulibarri v. Gerstenberger 871 P.2d 698 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
Ulibarri v. Gerstenberger 871 P.2d 698 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
State v. Kiles 857 P.2d 1212 Ariz. 1993
State v. Kiles 857 P.2d 1212 Ariz. 1993
State v. Duzan 862 P.2d 223 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
State v. Duzan 862 P.2d 223 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
410 , 577 (1992) (upon appellate court’s implicit fundamental error review, instruction including same definition of reasonable doubt accepted).
Wiley v. Industrial Com'n of Arizona 847 P.2d 595 Ariz. 1993