Cited by
Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Barreras, 892 P.2d 852.
- Ingram v. Hernandez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
- Ingram v. Hernandez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
- State v. Blunt Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
- State v. Blunt Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
- State v. Roberts Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
- State v. Roberts Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
- State v. Blomdahl Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
- State v. Blomdahl Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
- Christopher B. v. Mia D. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
-
Christopher B. v. Mia D.
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
(granting counsel’s motion to withdraw); (granting a continuance).
- State v. Dzieglo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
- State v. Dzieglo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
- State v. Anderson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
- State v. Anderson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
- State v. Abbott Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
- State v. Abbott Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
- State of Arizona v. Johnathan Ian Burns 344 P.3d 303 Ariz. 2015
- State of Arizona v. Johnathan Ian Burns 344 P.3d 303 Ariz. 2015
- State of Arizona v. Trent Christopher Benson 307 P.3d 19 Ariz. 2013
- State of Arizona v. Trent Christopher Benson 307 P.3d 19 Ariz. 2013
- State v. Pete J. Vanwinkle 285 P.3d 308 Ariz. 2012
- State v. Pete J. Vanwinkle 285 P.3d 308 Ariz. 2012
- State v. Wallace 191 P.3d 164 Ariz. 2008
-
State v. Wallace
191 P.3d 164
Ariz. 2008
11 5 Our conclusion that the jury was improperly instructed on the issue of gratuitous violence therefore requires that we vacate the three death sentences.
- State v. Barraza 170 P.3d 293 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
- Pamela Manic v. Tucson City Attorney's Office Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2006
-
Pamela Manic v. Tucson City Attorney's Office
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2006
See, (statute codifies case holding on access to psychiatric evaluations for capital sentencing determinations); Stewart v. Mutual of Omaha Ins.
- State v. Glassel 116 P.3d 1193 Ariz. 2005
-
State v. Glassel
116 P.3d 1193
Ariz. 2005
Because the jury is asked, as is this Court in the context of its independent review of a death sentence, to exercise its subjective judgment as to the weight of the actual evidence of aggravation and mitigation, see State - 19 - v. Barrerras, we cannot conclude that the trial court abused its discretion in refusing to allow the requested questions.
- In Re Maricopa County Superior Court No. Mh2003-000240 78 P.3d 1088 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2003
- In Re Maricopa County Superior Court No. Mh2003-000240 78 P.3d 1088 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2003
- State v. Ring 65 P.3d 915 Ariz. 2003
-
State v. Ring
65 P.3d 915
Ariz. 2003
See, , 523-24 n. 7, , 859-60 n. 7 (1995) (“The amended statute [permitting natural life sentence] is inapplicable here, however, because this case arose before its effective date.”).
- State v. Greene 967 P.2d 106 Ariz. 1998
- State v. Schackart 947 P.2d 315 Ariz. 1997
- State v. Schackart 947 P.2d 315 Ariz. 1997
- State v. Soto-Fong 928 P.2d 610 Ariz. 1996
-
State v. Soto-Fong
928 P.2d 610
Ariz. 1996
State v. Smith (Bernard)
- State v. Hyde 921 P.2d 655 Ariz. 1996
- State v. Hyde 921 P.2d 655 Ariz. 1996
- State v. Towery 920 P.2d 290 Ariz. 1996
- State v. Towery 920 P.2d 290 Ariz. 1996
- State v. Mata 916 P.2d 1035 Ariz. 1996
- State v. Jones 917 P.2d 200 Ariz. 1996
-
State v. Jones
917 P.2d 200
Ariz. 1996
urder victim is a witness to some other crime, and is killed to prevent that person from testifying about the other crime”; (2) the defendant has stated that witness elimination was a motive for the murder; or (3) “extraordinary circumstances of the crime show, beyond a reasonable doubt, that witness elimination is a motive.” Ross, 180 Ariz. at 606 , 886 P.2d at 1362
- State v. Roscoe 910 P.2d 635 Ariz. 1996
- State v. Roscoe 910 P.2d 635 Ariz. 1996
- State v. Gulbrandson 906 P.2d 579 Ariz. 1995
-
State v. Gulbrandson
906 P.2d 579
Ariz. 1995
We have rejected the argument that our weighing approach is unconstitutional and have held that “our statute provides constitutionally acceptable standards for deciding whether aggravating circumstances outweigh mitigating factors.” , see also Stokley, 182 Ariz. at 516 , 898 P.2d at 465
- State v. Murray 906 P.2d 542 Ariz. 1995