Cited by
Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Greenway, 823 P.2d 22.
- 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
- State v. Lopez 857 P.2d 1261 Ariz. 1993
- State v. Lopez 857 P.2d 1261 Ariz. 1993
- State v. Bible 858 P.2d 1152 Ariz. 1993
-
State v. Bible
858 P.2d 1152
Ariz. 1993
§ 13-703(G) as well as “any aspect of the defendant’s character or record and any circumstance of the offense relevant to determining whether a sentence less severe than death is appropriate.” , (citing cases).
- State v. Runningeagle 859 P.2d 169 Ariz. 1993
- State v. Runningeagle 859 P.2d 169 Ariz. 1993
- State v. Spencer 859 P.2d 146 Ariz. 1993
- State v. Spencer 859 P.2d 146 Ariz. 1993
- State v. Landrigan 859 P.2d 111 Ariz. 1993
-
State v. Landrigan
859 P.2d 111
Ariz. 1993
EIGHTH AMENDMENT Defendant argues that Arizona’s death penalty scheme, taken as a whole, violates the Eighth Amendment by failing to “sufficiently channel the sentencer’s discretipn.” , (Arizona’s death penalty statute narrowly defines the class of death-eligible defendants).
- State v. Salazar 844 P.2d 566 Ariz. 1992
- State v. Salazar 844 P.2d 566 Ariz. 1992
- State v. Cook 821 P.2d 731 Ariz. 1991