Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Ring, 25 P.3d 1139.

73 citing documents.

State v. Rutledge 66 P.3d 50 Ariz. 2003
State v. Rutledge 66 P.3d 50 Ariz. 2003
(Ring I), and remanded for further proceedings consistent with its decision.
State v. Ring 65 P.3d 915 Ariz. 2003
State v. Ring 65 P.3d 915 Ariz. 2003
State v. Towery 64 P.3d 828 Ariz. 2003
State of Arizona v. Roger Wayne Murray Ariz. 2003
State of Arizona v. Roger Wayne Murray Ariz. 2003
1 -80 ¶ 44, -52 (2001) (Ring I), guided by Walton v. Arizona, 497 U.S. 639, 110 S. Ct. 3047 (1990), this court held that Arizona’s former capital sentencing scheme, in which a judge decided whether aggravating circumstances existed, comported with the Sixth Amendment.
State v. Towery 64 P.3d 828 Ariz. 2003
279-80 1144, -52 (2001) (Ring I), guided by Walton v. Arizona, 497 U.S. 639 , 110 S.Ct.
State v. Smith 50 P.3d 825 Ariz. 2002
State v. Smith 50 P.3d 825 Ariz. 2002
-80 ¶ 44, -52 ¶ 44 (2001).
State v. Jones 49 P.3d 273 Ariz. 2002
State v. Jones 49 P.3d 273 Ariz. 2002
-80 ¶ 44, -52 ¶ 44 (2001).
State v. Finch 46 P.3d 421 Ariz. 2002
State v. Finch 46 P.3d 421 Ariz. 2002
-80 ¶ 44, -52 ¶ 44 (2001), cert.
State v. Cañez 42 P.3d 564 Ariz. 2002
State v. Canez 42 P.3d 564 Ariz. 2002
State v. Cañez 42 P.3d 564 Ariz. 2002
For a fuller treatment of the issue, -80 , , 1150-52 ¶¶ 40-44 (2001), , , 503 ¶¶ 40-44 (2001).
State v. Canez 42 P.3d 564 Ariz. 2002
For a fuller treatment of the issue, -80, -52 ¶¶40-44 (2001), ¶¶40-44 (2001).
State v. Pandeli 26 P.3d 1136 Ariz. 2001
State v. Pandeli 26 P.3d 1136 Ariz. 2001
3047 , 111 L.Ed.2d 511 (1990); -279 , -1151, ¶¶ 40-44 (2001), regarding the issue raised under Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 , 120 S.Ct.
State v. Harrod 26 P.3d 492 Ariz. 2001
State v. Sansing 26 P.3d 1118 Ariz. 2001
State v. Sansing 26 P.3d 1118 Ariz. 2001
-279 , , 1150-1151 ¶¶ 40-44 (2001).