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. Comer, 799 P.2d 333.

147 citing documents.

  • State v. Medina 975 P.2d 94 Ariz. 1999
  • State v. Doerr 969 P.2d 1168 Ariz. 1998
  • State v. Doerr 969 P.2d 1168 Ariz. 1998
    We have found gratuitous violence where the victim suffered a large number of stab wounds and a contact gunshot wound to the head, Amaya-Ruiz, 166 Ariz. at 178 , 800 P.2d at 1286 ; a stabbing in'the throat following a shooting, , two blows to the head with a bat followed by smothering and strangulation, -89 , -18 (1996); numerous gunshot wounds to the head from different weapons, , continued bludgeoning
  • State v. Lee 944 P.2d 1204 Ariz. 1997
  • State v. Lee 944 P.2d 1204 Ariz. 1997
    See Atwood, 171 Ariz. at 613 , 832 P.2d at 630 (“He must show ‘that he has both important testimony to give on some counts and strong reasons for not testifying on others.’ ”) ( , ).
  • State v. Soto-Fong 928 P.2d 610 Ariz. 1996
  • State v. Soto-Fong 928 P.2d 610 Ariz. 1996
    2044 , 114 L.Ed.2d 129 (1991) (finding gratuitous violence where the victim was stabbed twenty-three times and shot in the ear); 429 , 349 (1990), cert.
  • State v. Winkle 922 P.2d 301 Ariz. 1996
  • State v. Winkle 922 P.2d 301 Ariz. 1996
  • State v. Murray 906 P.2d 542 Ariz. 1995
  • State v. Murray 906 P.2d 542 Ariz. 1995
    We also have stated that “a robbery may also be established when the use of force precedes the actual taking of property, so long as the use of force is accompanied with the intent to take another’s property.” , cert.
  • State v. Smith 893 P.2d 764 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
  • State v. Smith 893 P.2d 764 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
  • State v. Barreras 892 P.2d 852 Ariz. 1995
  • State v. Ross 886 P.2d 1354 Ariz. 1994
  • State v. Ross 886 P.2d 1354 Ariz. 1994
    (murder senseless because it was unnecessary to accomplish defendant’s goal of obtaining money and supplies, not that it was committed without purpose), cert.
  • Wohlstrom v. Buchanan 884 P.2d 687 Ariz. 1994
  • Wohlstrom v. Buchanan 884 P.2d 687 Ariz. 1994
    1454, 1470 , 28 L.Ed.2d 711 (1971) (upholding Ohio practice of determining guilt and punishment in same proceeding though defendant was forced to either waive privilege or forego opportunity to speak at sentencing); , cert.
  • State v. Wood 881 P.2d 1158 Ariz. 1994
  • State v. Wood 881 P.2d 1158 Ariz. 1994
  • State v. Gallegos 870 P.2d 1097 Ariz. 1994
  • State v. Gallegos 870 P.2d 1097 Ariz. 1994
    ant also stated that once he and George thought that the victim was dead, they decided that they “might as well finish.” In State v. Comer, we upheld the defendant’s conviction for armed robbery of a dead victim in part because “the only reasonable inference based on the evidence was that [defendant] shot [the victim] in furtherance of his previously formulated plan to obtain money and supplies.”
  • State v. Rojas 868 P.2d 1037 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
  • State v. Rojas 868 P.2d 1037 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
  • State v. Milke 865 P.2d 779 Ariz. 1993
  • State v. Milke 865 P.2d 779 Ariz. 1993
    First, she argues that the crime was not senseless because the crime was necessary to accomplish the goals attributed to her by the state, , cert.
  • 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
    (the fact that juror has prior knowledge of a case is not a sufficient basis to disqualify the juror), cert.
  • State v. West 862 P.2d 192 Ariz. 1993
  • State v. West 862 P.2d 192 Ariz. 1993
  • State v. Huerta 855 P.2d 776 Ariz. 1993
  • State v. Huerta 855 P.2d 776 Ariz. 1993
    The court of appeals concluded that the reasoning in the recent Supreme Court case of Ross v. Oklahoma, 487 U.S. 81 , 108 S. Ct. 2273 , 101 L.Ed.2d 80 (1988), and Justice Corcoran’s , cert.
  • State v. Aussie 854 P.2d 158 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
  • State v. Aussie 854 P.2d 158 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
    See State *127 v. Comer, -423 , -343 (1990), cert.
  • State v. Spencer 859 P.2d 146 Ariz. 1993
  • State v. Spencer 859 P.2d 146 Ariz. 1993
    See State v. *44 Comer, , cert.
  • State v. Atwood 832 P.2d 593 Ariz. 1992
  • State v. Atwood 832 P.2d 593 Ariz. 1992
  • State v. Huerta 826 P.2d 1210 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
  • State v. Huerta 826 P.2d 1210 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
  • State v. Lopez 822 P.2d 465 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
  • State v. Lopez 822 P.2d 465 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
    416 n. 1 , 336 n. 1 (App.1990).
  • State v. Oliver 821 P.2d 250 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
  • State v. Oliver 821 P.2d 250 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
  • State v. White 815 P.2d 869 Ariz. 1991