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. Jackson, 918 P.2d 1038.

80 citing documents.

  • State v. Martinez 999 P.2d 795 Ariz. 2000
  • State v. Martinez 999 P.2d 795 Ariz. 2000
    -31 , -49 (1996) (finding that, in addition to chronological age, we must consider a defendant’s: (1) level of intelligence, (2) maturity, (3) participation in the murder, and (4) criminal history and past experience with law enforcement).
  • State v. Clabourne 983 P.2d 748 Ariz. 1999
  • State v. Clabourne 983 P.2d 748 Ariz. 1999
  • State v. White 982 P.2d 819 Ariz. 1999
  • State v. White 982 P.2d 819 Ariz. 1999
  • State v. Sharp 973 P.2d 1171 Ariz. 1999
  • State v. Sharp 973 P.2d 1171 Ariz. 1999
  • State v. Djerf 959 P.2d 1274 Ariz. 1998
  • State v. Djerf 959 P.2d 1274 Ariz. 1998
    See, -32 , -50 (1996) (age sixteen not mitigating factor); , (age twenty not mitigating factor); -61 , -06 (1985) (age nineteen not mitigating factor).
  • State v. Tankersley 956 P.2d 486 Ariz. 1998
  • State v. Tankersley 956 P.2d 486 Ariz. 1998
    “To establish identity based on other acts, ‘the modus operandi of and the circumstances surrounding the two crimes must be sufficiently similar as to be like a signature.’ ” Hughes, 189 Ariz. at 68 , 938 P.2d at 463 ( , cert.
  • State v. Garland 953 P.2d 1266 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
  • State v. Garland 953 P.2d 1266 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1998
    ¶ 22 The identity exception to Rule 404 only applies if the “ ‘pattern and characteristics of the crimes [are] so unusual and distinctive as to be like a signature.’ ” , (citing Morris K. Udall et al., Law of Evidence § 84, at 185 (3d ed.1991))(emphasis added); , cert.
  • Holmberg v. Leon 938 P.2d 1110 Ariz. 1997
  • Holmberg v. Leon 938 P.2d 1110 Ariz. 1997
    we again found no abuse of discretion where the trial court allowed the state to file its notice one day late because it was clear that the defendant had actual notice of the prosecutor’s intent to seek the death penalty at least one week before the state’s notice was due.
  • State v. Hughes 938 P.2d 457 Ariz. 1997
  • State v. Hughes 938 P.2d 457 Ariz. 1997
    To establish identity based on other acts, “‘the modus operandi of and the circumstances surrounding the two crimes must be sufficiently similar’ as to be like a signature.” , , cert denied, — U.S.-, 117 S.Ct.
  • State v. Soto-Fong 928 P.2d 610 Ariz. 1996
  • State v. Soto-Fong 928 P.2d 610 Ariz. 1996
    we observed that no national consensus of the type alleged by defendant exists and expressly stated that “we have found ‘no constitutional authority or statutory provision [that] prohibits the sentencing of a 16-year-old to death.’ ” Id.
  • State v. Dickens 926 P.2d 468 Ariz. 1996
  • State v. Dickens 926 P.2d 468 Ariz. 1996
  • Barrs v. WILKINSON IN AND FOR MARICOPA 924 P.2d 1033 Ariz. 1996
  • Barrs v. WILKINSON IN AND FOR MARICOPA 924 P.2d 1033 Ariz. 1996
  • State v. Miller 921 P.2d 1151 Ariz. 1996
  • State v. Miller 921 P.2d 1151 Ariz. 1996
  • State v. Laird 920 P.2d 769 Ariz. 1996
  • State v. Laird 920 P.2d 769 Ariz. 1996
  • State v. Miles 918 P.2d 1028 Ariz. 1996
  • State v. Miles 918 P.2d 1028 Ariz. 1996