Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Carter, 399 P.2d 191.

34 citing documents.

State of Arizona v. Dewayne Esaw 554 P.3d 14 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2024
State of Arizona v. Dewayne Esaw 554 P.3d 14 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2024
(advisory counsel can be appointed “to make sure of an orderly trial with as little opportunity for error as possible”).
State Ex Rel. Thomas v. Gordon 144 P.3d 513 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2006
State Ex Rel. Thomas v. Gordon 144 P.3d 513 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2006
§ 12-411); , (defendant not entitled to peremptory challenge because defendant had already exercised such a challenge; citing A.R.S.
State v. Mott 784 P.2d 278 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
State v. Mott 784 P.2d 278 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
The state points out that defendant’s
State v. Fayle 658 P.2d 218 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
State v. Fayle 658 P.2d 218 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
State v. Parker 524 P.2d 506 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1974
State v. Parker 524 P.2d 506 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1974
State v. Thompson 516 P.2d 42 Ariz. 1973
State v. Thompson 516 P.2d 42 Ariz. 1973
State v. Smith 506 P.2d 670 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
State v. Smith 506 P.2d 670 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1973
State v. Cufio 471 P.2d 763 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
State v. Cufio 471 P.2d 763 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
State v. Hannon 451 P.2d 602 Ariz. 1969
State v. Hannon 451 P.2d 602 Ariz. 1969
State v. Scofield 438 P.2d 776 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1968
State v. Scofield 438 P.2d 776 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1968
State Ex Rel. Riley v. Collins 435 P.2d 871 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1968
State Ex Rel. Riley v. Collins 435 P.2d 871 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1968
Rule 198, Rules of Criminal Procedure, 17 A.R.S., § 12-411 A.R.S.
Carter v. State ex rel. Eyman 427 P.2d 549 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1967
Carter v. State ex rel. Eyman 427 P.2d 549 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1967
Carter v. State ex rel. Eyman 424 P.2d 858 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1967
Carter v. State ex rel. Eyman 424 P.2d 858 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1967
State v. Neil 419 P.2d 388 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1966
State v. Neil 419 P.2d 388 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1966
We are fortified in our conclusion that this rule pertaining to the conduct of a , which holds that the peremptory challenge to a judge, taken at the time of the first trial, exhausts the challenge, even though the first trial ends in a mistrial and a new judge is assigned to the second trial.
Garcia v. Eyman 417 P.2d 550 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1966
Garcia v. Eyman 417 P.2d 550 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1966
State v. Court of Appeals, Division Two 416 P.2d 599 Ariz. 1966
State v. Court of Appeals, Division Two 416 P.2d 599 Ariz. 1966
State v. Miranda 416 P.2d 444 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1966
State v. Miranda 416 P.2d 444 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1966