DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite West v. State, 208 P. 412.

48 citing documents.

  • R.M. v. L.C. 805 P.2d 1067 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1990
  • Matter of Estate of RC 805 P.2d 1067 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1990
  • Matter of Estate of RC 805 P.2d 1067 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1990
    held that a judicial confession or admission connected with the crime made in court is admissible, , 208 P. 412 (1922): `It is well settled that any statements made by a defendant prior to his trial, having the effect of an admission, connecting him with the act, and likewise a confession that he committed the act, whether judicial or extrajudicial, if made without coercion, duress, or hope of reward, may be used b
  • R.M. v. L.C. 805 P.2d 1067 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1990
    held that a judicial confession or admission connected with the crime made in court is admissible, , 208 P. 412 (1922): ‘It is well settled that any statements made by a defendant prior to his trial, having the effect of an admission, connecting him with the act, and likewise a confession that he committed the act, whether judicial or extrajudicial, if made without coercion, duress, or hope of reward, may be used b
  • State v. Sanchez 659 P.2d 1268 Ariz. 1983
  • State v. Sanchez 659 P.2d 1268 Ariz. 1983
    208 P. 412, 415-16 (1922).
  • State v. Sanchez 659 P.2d 1289 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1982
  • State v. Sanchez 659 P.2d 1289 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1982
    See, , , 208 P. 412 (1922); State v. Reynolds, 9 Ariz.App.
  • State v. Tudgay 623 P.2d 360 Ariz. 1981
  • State v. Tudgay 623 P.2d 360 Ariz. 1981
    208 P. 412 (1922): ‘ “It is well settled that any statements made by a defendant prior to his trial, having the effect of an admission, connecting him with the act, and likewise a confession that he committed the act, whether judicial or extrajudicial, if made without coercion, duress, or hope of reward, may be used
  • State v. Sustaita 583 P.2d 239 Ariz. 1978
  • State v. Sustaita 583 P.2d 239 Ariz. 1978
    P. 458 (1923); , 208 P. 412 (1922).
  • State v. Stoneman 566 P.2d 1340 Ariz. 1977
  • State v. Stoneman 566 P.2d 1340 Ariz. 1977
    we held that a judicial confession or admission connected with the crime made in court is admissible, , 208 P. 412 (1922): “ ‘It is well settled that any statements made by a defendant prior to his trial, having the effect of an admission, connecting him with the act, and likewise a confession that he committed the act, whether judicial or extrajudicial, if made without coercion, duress, or hope of reward, may be used
  • State v. Clayton 514 P.2d 720 Ariz. 1973
  • State v. Clayton 514 P.2d 720 Ariz. 1973
  • State v. Reynolds 449 P.2d 968 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
  • State v. Reynolds 449 P.2d 968 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
  • State v. Garcia 433 P.2d 18 Ariz. 1967
  • State v. Garcia 433 P.2d 18 Ariz. 1967
  • State v. Goodyear 404 P.2d 397 Ariz. 1965
  • State v. Goodyear 404 P.2d 397 Ariz. 1965
    212 P. 458 (1923) ; *318 , 208 P. 412 (1922).
  • State v. Carter 399 P.2d 191 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1965
  • State v. Carter 399 P.2d 191 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1965
    168 P. 508 ; , 208 P. 412 .
  • State v. Corrales 391 P.2d 563 Ariz. 1964
  • State v. Corrales 391 P.2d 563 Ariz. 1964
    212 P. 458 (1923) ; , 208 P. 412 (1922).
  • State v. Griffith 376 P.2d 134 Ariz. 1962
  • State v. Griffith 376 P.2d 134 Ariz. 1962
  • State v. Holman 356 P.2d 27 Ariz. 1960
  • State v. Holman 356 P.2d 27 Ariz. 1960
    212 P. 458 ; , 208 P. 412 .
  • State v. Sorrell 333 P.2d 1081 Ariz. 1959
  • State v. Sorrell 333 P.2d 1081 Ariz. 1959
    208 P. 412, 417 , is particularly apropos to cases such as this : “ * * * Just why county attorneys will, in the prosecution of criminal cases, insist upon getting into the record, as evidence, things that are clearly not evidence, especially in a case wherein the evidence of guilt of the defendant is overwhelming
  • State v. Polan 278 P.2d 432 Ariz. 1954
  • State v. Polan 278 P.2d 432 Ariz. 1954
    West v. State, 1922, , 208 P. 412 .
  • State v. Thomas 275 P.2d 408 Ariz. 1954
  • State v. Thomas 275 P.2d 408 Ariz. 1954
    charged.” , 208 P. 412, 417 .
  • Burgunder v. State of Arizona 103 P.2d 256 Ariz. 1940
  • Burgunder v. State of Arizona 103 P.2d 256 Ariz. 1940
    That, we think, , 208 Pac.
  • Cochrane v. State of Arizona 59 P.2d 658 Ariz. 1936
  • Cochrane v. State of Arizona 59 P.2d 658 Ariz. 1936
    It is always competent to inquire into a witness’ previous occupation, companions and associates for the purpose of affecting his credibility.” See, also, , 208 Pac.
  • Douglass v. State 33 P.2d 985 Ariz. 1934
  • Douglass v. State 33 P.2d 985 Ariz. 1934
  • Johnson v. State 264 P. 1083 Ariz. 1928
  • Johnson v. State 264 P. 1083 Ariz. 1928
  • Wilson v. State 237 P. 950 Ariz. 1925
  • Wilson v. State 237 P. 950 Ariz. 1925
  • Hadley v. State 212 P. 458 Ariz. 1923
  • Hadley v. State 212 P. 458 Ariz. 1923