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. Krone, 897 P.2d 621.

76 citing documents.

  • State v. Doss 966 P.2d 1012 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
    (defendant may not want lesser-induded instruction, and should not have one forced on him); , (state entitled to lesser-induded offense instruction after defendant’s objection).
  • State v. Ramirez 945 P.2d 376 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
  • State v. Rienhardt 951 P.2d 454 Ariz. 1997
  • State v. Rienhardt 951 P.2d 454 Ariz. 1997
  • State v. Leon 945 P.2d 1290 Ariz. 1997
  • State v. Leon 945 P.2d 1290 Ariz. 1997
  • State v. Tinajero 935 P.2d 928 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
  • State v. Tinajero 935 P.2d 928 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
    (“[T]he propriety of a given sanction for a discovery violation is largely within the discretion of the trial judge.”) 4.
  • State v. Palenkas 933 P.2d 1269 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
  • State v. Palenkas 933 P.2d 1269 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
  • State v. Cruz 938 P.2d 78 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
  • State v. Cruz 938 P.2d 78 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
  • State v. Rodriguez 921 P.2d 643 Ariz. 1996
  • State v. Rodriguez 921 P.2d 643 Ariz. 1996
  • State v. Killean 915 P.2d 1225 Ariz. 1996
  • State v. Killean 915 P.2d 1225 Ariz. 1996
  • State v. Jackson 918 P.2d 1038 Ariz. 1996
  • State v. Jackson 918 P.2d 1038 Ariz. 1996
    “To determine whether there is sufficient evidence to require the giving of a lesser included offense instruction, the test is ‘whether the jury could rationally fail to find the distinguishing element of the greater offense.’ ” , ( , ).
  • State v. Paxton 925 P.2d 721 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
  • State v. Paxton 925 P.2d 721 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
    by allowing a witness to be interviewed during trial.”
  • State v. Kemp 912 P.2d 1281 Ariz. 1996
  • State v. Kemp 912 P.2d 1281 Ariz. 1996
  • State v. Killean 907 P.2d 550 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
  • State v. Killean 907 P.2d 550 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
    [and] should cure that harm to the maximum practicable extent[,]” , we note that the court prudently did not impose the sanction of preclusion immediately.
  • State v. Murray 906 P.2d 542 Ariz. 1995
  • State v. Murray 906 P.2d 542 Ariz. 1995