Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Wood, 881 P.2d 1158.

119 citing documents.

  • State v. Towery 920 P.2d 290 Ariz. 1996
  • State v. Medrano 914 P.2d 225 Ariz. 1996
  • State v. Medrano 914 P.2d 225 Ariz. 1996
    See Stokley, 182 Ariz. at 520 , 898 P.2d at 469 (disposing of the bodies, burning victims’ clothing, and the ability to guide police to the scene and recall events showed no significant impairment); , cert.
  • State v. Fernane 914 P.2d 1314 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1995
  • State v. Fernane 914 P.2d 1314 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1995
    "[I]n light of the totality of the trial evidence,” and considering “the fact-specific nature of the inquiry," we cannot say beyond a reasonable doubt that the erroneous admission of all of the prior bad acts evidence against appellant (particularly as it was utilized and argued by Stern) was harmless or " ‘had no influence on the jury’s judgment.’ ” , ( , ), cert.
  • State v. Murray 906 P.2d 542 Ariz. 1995
  • State v. Murray 906 P.2d 542 Ariz. 1995
    This factor is disjunctive, “so that proof of incapacity as to either ability to appreciate or conform estab *41 lishes the mitigating circumstance.” , cert.
  • State v. Williams 904 P.2d 437 Ariz. 1995
  • State v. Williams 904 P.2d 437 Ariz. 1995
    -62 , -67 (1994) (evidence of previous difficulties between the accused and the victim is admissible where premeditation is at issue), cert.
  • State v. Krum 903 P.2d 596 Ariz. 1995
  • State v. Krum 903 P.2d 596 Ariz. 1995
    (noting that courts generally should not decide issues unnecessary to the disposition of an appeal), cert.
  • State v. Stokley 898 P.2d 454 Ariz. 1995
  • State v. Stokley 898 P.2d 454 Ariz. 1995
    This factor is disjunctive, “so that proof of incapacity as to either ability to appreciate or conform establishes the mitigating circumstance.”
  • State v. Barreras 892 P.2d 852 Ariz. 1995
  • State v. Willoughby 892 P.2d 1319 Ariz. 1995
  • State v. Gonzales 892 P.2d 838 Ariz. 1995
  • State v. Barreras 892 P.2d 852 Ariz. 1995
  • State v. Gonzales 892 P.2d 838 Ariz. 1995
  • State v. Willoughby 892 P.2d 1319 Ariz. 1995
    (lesser-included offense instruction not required if not supported by the evidence).