Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Watton, 793 P.2d 80.

125 citing documents.

State v. Ysea 956 P.2d 499 Ariz. 1998
State v. Ketchum 956 P.2d 1237 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
State v. Ketchum 956 P.2d 1237 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
State v. Krum 903 P.2d 596 Ariz. 1995
State v. Krum 903 P.2d 596 Ariz. 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
Schrock, 149 Ariz. at 441 , 719 P.2d at 1057 ; , , cert.
State v. Dalglish 901 P.2d 1218 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
State v. Dalglish 901 P.2d 1218 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
State v. Rosas 904 P.2d 1245 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
State v. Rosas 904 P.2d 1245 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
State v. Johnson 890 P.2d 641 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
State v. Johnson 890 P.2d 641 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
State v. Andersen 868 P.2d 964 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
State v. Andersen 868 P.2d 964 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
State v. Freeland 863 P.2d 263 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
State v. Freeland 863 P.2d 263 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
An evidentiary hearing is not warranted, however, unless defendant asserts a “color-able claim.” , , 17 A.R.S.
State v. Runningeagle 859 P.2d 169 Ariz. 1993
State v. Runningeagle 859 P.2d 169 Ariz. 1993
State v. Schurz 859 P.2d 156 Ariz. 1993
State v. Schurz 859 P.2d 156 Ariz. 1993
(defendant entitled to an evidentiary hearing only if petition presents a colorable claim — one that, if defendant’s allegations are true, might have changed the verdict).
State v. Diaz 842 P.2d 617 Ariz. 1992
State v. Diaz 842 P.2d 617 Ariz. 1992
“A defendant who has received the full benefit of a plea bargain cannot be allowed to withdraw the plea merely because of disagreement with the sentence.”
State v. Harrison 799 P.2d 898 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1990
State v. Harrison 799 P.2d 898 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1990