| 1 CA-CR 13-0248 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2014-05-08 |
—
|
State v. Smith
|
|
… al interrogation, were given after the police advised Smith of his rights under Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 478-79 (1966). But even if Smith’s statements were inadmissible, their admission is not reversible error. ¶14 Smit …
|
| 2 CA-CV 2013-0143 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2014-04-30 |
—
|
SVENDSEN v. ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
|
|
… field sobriety tests, Officer Nielsen arrested Svendsen and advised him of his Miranda1 rights. He then read Svendsen an Admin Per Se/Implied Consent Affidavit form. The officer asked if Svendsen would submit to a breath test, and Svendsen …
|
| 1 CA-CR 13-0166 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2014-04-29 |
—
|
State v. Castillo
|
|
… any statements she made to the police on the grounds she was not advised of her Miranda rights. The parties eventually stipulated that Castillo’s statements would be suppressed. ¶4 The State called Officer Rude to testify at tr …
|
| 1 CA-CR 12-0297 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2014-04-24 |
—
|
State v. Abdullah
|
|
… r and the detectives improperly continued the interrogation in violation of his Miranda rights. The court reviewed a video and transcript of the interrogation and found that after Abdullah requested a lawyer the detectives did not continue …
|
| 1 CA-SA 14-0028 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2014-04-17 |
—
|
State v. Hon. mroz/saldate/milke
|
|
… Amendment privilege claim centers around accusations he engaged in a pattern of Miranda and other constitutional violations while interrogating criminal suspects. Although a conspiracy to violate civil rights, like any conspiracy, does not …
|
| 1 CA-CR 12-0302 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2014-04-08 |
—
|
State v. Chavez
|
|
… tatements to police officers during their investigation were inadmissible under Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), or that the trial court made improper comments during sentencing. Furthermore, although both parties raise arguments re …
|
| 1 CA-CR 12-0481 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2014-03-27 |
—
|
State v. Warren
|
|
… At the station, Officer Barton advised Appellant of his rights pursuant to Miranda, 3 and Appellant agreed to speak with him. When asked why he possessed the handgun, Appellant stated, “Because I love my life. Everybody has a gun out t …
|
| 1 CA-CR 12-0714 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2014-03-25 |
—
|
State v. Baker
|
|
… le, Baker filed a motion to dismiss the case, alleging that he was not read his Miranda rights pursuant to Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966). After conducting a hearing and watching a video of Baker receiving the Miranda warnings, the …
|
| 1 CA-CR 12-0811 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2014-03-18 |
—
|
State v. Espinoza
|
|
… ntil police arrived. ¶7 Espinoza was taken into custody, read his Miranda 2 warning, and escorted to the police station. During questioning, Espinoza admitted he participated in the home invasion and acknowledged having a weap …
|
| CR-11-0151-AP |
Ariz. |
2014-03-18 |
—
|
State v. Israel Joseph Naranjo
|
|
… for each murder. II. ISSUES ON APPEAL A. Waiver of Miranda Rights ¶4 Naranjo argues the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress his post-arrest confession. We review that ruling for abuse …
|
| 1 CA-CR 13-0188 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2014-03-11 |
—
|
State v. Hersum
|
|
… rawn. He was not subject to a traffic stop, was not handcuffed, did not receive Miranda warnings, and was not accompanied to the hospital by law enforcement. Cf. State v. Rowland, 172 Ariz. 182, 184, 836 P.2d 395, 397 (App. 1992) (indicia o …
|
| 1 CA-CR 13-0335 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2014-02-27 |
—
|
State v. Conner
|
|
… ed to be a controlled substance. He proceeded to arrest Conner and read her the Miranda warning. Conner was asked how much “meth” she had in the pouch, she answered “a ball.” She also admitted to buying it earlier that day for $160. ¶4 …
|
| cl-2654871 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2014-02-25 |
—
|
State v. Gallegos
|
|
… apartment were detained for further investigation. Gallegos was advised of his Miranda1 rights and spoke with officers. ¶5 Gallegos initially denied any knowledge of the guitar and keys stolen from Bookman’s. When police informe …
|
| CR-13-0060-AP |
Ariz. |
2013-11-21 |
—
|
State of Arizona v. Richard J. Glassel
|
|
… ic Advocate, Phoenix, for Richard J. Glassel Colleen Clase (argued), Daniel L. Miranda, and Jeffrey Johnson of Arizona Voice for Crime Victims, Tempe, for Amici Curiae Duane Lynn, David Lynn, Cathy Morgan, Cindy Bays, Thomas Lynn, Phillip …
|
| CR-13-0087-PR |
Ariz. |
2013-11-07 |
—
|
State of Arizona v. Anthony Duran
|
|
… retrial ruling conditionally admitting his statements [obtained in violation of Miranda] for impeachment in the event he did testify”). ¶10 Duran argues that Barker and its progeny should not control here because a trial court’s erroneous …
|
| 2 CA-CR 2012-0315 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2013-10-30 |
—
|
State of Arizona v. Angelino Paolo Buccheri-Bianca
|
|
… the light most favorable to upholding the determination of the jury. State v. Miranda-Cabrera, 209 Ariz. 220, 221-22, 99 P.3d 35, 36-37 (App. 2004). ¶39 Buccheri-Bianca points out various inconsistencies in the children’s tes …
|
| 2 CA-CR 2012-0124 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2013-09-27 |
—
|
State of Arizona v. Heulon Colston Brown
|
|
… med Brown that he was being detained and advised him of his rights pursuant to Miranda,1 after which Brown said, “I’ll answer your questions.” Although Brown had been given medication, Detective Cassel noted that the conversation was “no …
|
| 2 CA-CR 2012-0228 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2013-08-30 |
—
|
State of Arizona v. Angel Antonio Perez
|
|
… ed the conversation, that he made no promises to Perez, that he read Perez his Miranda rights, and that he did not consider the interview a “free talk” with the “normal free talk rules.” Perez, who did not testify at the hearing, offered …
|
| CR-09-0081-AP |
Ariz. |
2013-08-21 |
—
|
State of Arizona v. Christopher Mathew Payne
|
|
… ed by refusing to suppress his post-arrest statements, which he claims violated Miranda and were involuntary. We review rulings admitting a defendant’s statements for an 9 …
|
| CV-12-0402-PR |
Ariz. |
2013-05-30 |
—
|
State of Arizona v. Hon. butler/tyler B.
|
|
… s and contacted the sheriffs office. ¶ 3 A deputy sheriff soon arrived and read Miranda warnings to Tyler. In the presence of several school officials, Tyler admitted that he had driven his car to school after smoking marijuana and that he …
|
| CR-12-0238-PR |
Ariz. |
2013-04-04 |
—
|
State of Arizona v. David James Yonkman
|
|
… t there. When he returned, the officer read Yonkman his Miranda rights. After Yonkman requested counsel, the officer ceased questioning and departed. ¶3 A few days later, Kelly called Detecti …
|
| 2 CA-CR 2012-0003 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2013-01-28 |
—
|
State of Arizona v. Anthony Duran
|
|
… chment purposes, of involuntary statements and statements made in violation of Miranda.”3 State v. Smyers, 207 Ariz. 314, ¶ 14, 86 P.3d 370, 373 (2004). And this court recently applied the rule and its underlying reasoning to a cha …
|
| 2 CA-CR 2010-0106 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2012-11-08 |
—
|
State of Arizona v. Nelson Ivan Boteo-Flores
|
|
… him he was a police officer and handcuffed him. The officer then administered Miranda1 warnings and questioned him. The officer detained Boteo-Flores for fifteen to twenty minutes while waiting for an auto theft detective to arrive on s …
|
| 2 CA-SA 2012-0065 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2012-10-31 |
—
|
State of Arizona v. Tyler B.
|
|
… ric Heath responded. After Heath informed Tyler of his rights pursuant to Miranda,2 Tyler admitted he and his friends had left school, smoked marijuana, and then returned to campus, with Tyler driving the vehicle. Heath then informe …
|
| CR-11-0180-PR |
Ariz. |
2012-07-03 |
—
|
State of Arizona v. Nelson Ivan Boteo-Flores
|
|
… After handcuffing Boteo-Flores, the officer advised him of his Miranda rights and began questioning him. Shortly thereafter, a police unit returned and the officers called an auto theft detective to assist …
|
| 2 CA-CR 2011-0277 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2012-06-29 |
—
|
State of Arizona v. Francisco Antonio Lopez
|
|
… d 237, 246 (1994), that “[a] prosecutor may . . . comment on a defendant’s pre-Miranda[4] warnings silence, either before or after arrest, because no governmental action induced [the defendant] to remain silent,” it recently characterize …
|
| 2 CA-CR 2010-0338 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2012-04-26 |
—
|
State v. Yonkman
|
|
… xual contact. When Yonkman arrived, he was detained by the officer and read the Miranda warnings. 1 He immediately invoked his right to counsel, and the officer asked no further questions about the allegations. ¶ 7 Several days later, Tucso …
|
| CR-11-0083-PR |
Ariz. |
2012-04-09 |
—
|
State v. VanWinkle
|
|
… stice. ¶ 1 The question in this case is whether a defendant’s post-custody, pre-Miranda silence may be used as evidence of guilt. I. ¶ 2 Petitioner Pete J. VanWinkle and four others — Mike, Joel, Cory, and Gerry— were in Joel’s apartment. 1 …
|
| cl-867209 |
Ariz. |
2012-04-09 |
—
|
State of Arizona v. Pete J Vanwinkle
|
|
… The question in this case is whether a defendant’s post-custody, pre-Miranda silence may be used as evidence of guilt. I. ¶2 Petitioner Pete J. VanWinkle and four others — Mike, …
|
| CR-09-0341-AP |
Ariz. |
2012-03-27 |
—
|
State v. Wallace
|
|
… r. Wallace reported the crimes to the police the next day. After waiving his Miranda rights, he confessed in detail to the murders but could not explain why he committed them. ¶6 Wallace pleaded guilty and was sentenced to deat …
|
| CR-09-0218-AP |
Ariz. |
2012-03-22 |
—
|
State v. Cota
|
|
… State v. Clabourne, 142 Ariz. 335, 342, 690 P.2d 54, 61 (1984). We review the Miranda claim only for fundamental error. See State v. Henderson, 210 Ariz. 561, 567 ¶¶ 19-20, 115 P.3d 601, 607 (2005). 1. In …
|
| 1 CA-CV 10-0886 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2012-03-15 |
—
|
Best v. Miranda
|
|
… Best challenges the trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Arturo Miranda. Because we conclude that Best’s attempt to enforce the option contract failed as a matter of law when he did not tender the full purchase price in acco …
|
| No. 1 CA-CR 10-0766 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2012-01-31 |
—
|
State v. Penney
|
|
… l until he was moved to an interview room at 6:50 a.m. Penney was then read his Miranda 2 rights and answered Officer Thomas’s questions because he “felt like [he] had no choice at that point.” ¶ 7 Penney was charged with two counts of aggr …
|
| 1 CA-CR 10-0911 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2012-01-03 |
—
|
State v. Stevens
|
|
… chment with evidence of a defendant’s silence after arrest and the provision of Miranda 3 warnings. 4 See also Brecht v. Abra-hamson, 507 U.S. 619, 628 , 113 S.Ct. 1710 , 123 L.Ed.2d 353 (1993) (acknowledging that Doyle only applies to posb …
|
| No. 2 CA-CR 2010-0309 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2011-12-28 |
—
|
State v. Peterson
|
|
… name mixed among items bearing Peterson’s name. After advising Peterson of her Miranda 2 rights, another detective, Erie Brown, interviewed her before arresting her and having her taken to jail. ¶5 Peterson was charged with theft of means …
|
| 2 CA-CR 2011-0098 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2011-12-21 |
—
|
State of Arizona v. Ramon Limon
|
|
… rch was the result of his having been questioned illegally in violation of his Miranda1 rights. The trial court held a hearing on the motion and in a ruling filed on January 20, 2011, granted the motion to suppress. The state filed a moti …
|
| 2 CA-CR 2010-0382 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2011-11-30 |
—
|
State of Arizona v. Michael Jonathon Carlson
|
|
… had made to law enforcement officers, finding they were taken in violation of Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966). The state appealed the suppression order pursuant to A.R.S. § 13-4032(6). We affirm. ¶2 When reviewing a s …
|
| 1 CA-CV 10-0494 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2011-06-23 |
—
|
Estate of Maudsley v. Meta Services, Inc.
|
|
… y raised genuine issues of material fact as to proximate cause. See Stearman v. Miranda, 97 Ariz. 55, 59 , 396 P.2d 622, 625 (1964) (generally, proximate cause is to be decided by the factfinder). ¶ 14 Third, the record contains little info …
|
| 2 CA-SA 2010-0074 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2011-01-12 |
—
|
William Allen Lear v. State of Arizona
|
|
… o so; rather, we are compelled to follow supreme court precedent. See State v. Miranda, 198 Ariz. 426, ¶ 13, 10 P.3d 1213, 1216 (App. 2000), aff’d, 200 Ariz. 67, 22 P.3d 506 (2001). And based on the court‟s decision in Logerquist, as well …
|
| 2 CA-CR 2009-0176 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2010-11-16 |
—
|
State v. Blakley
|
|
… s confession and consent to search. ¶25 We also observe that Silva did not give Miranda 9 warnings to Blakley either before or after Blakley had confessed to storing marijuana in his garage. In Guillen , our supreme court noted: In analyzin …
|
| 2 CA-CR 2010-0004 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2010-10-28 |
—
|
State v. Kinney
|
|
… check his wallet to verify his identity. ¶4 One of the officers read Kinney the Miranda 1 warning, advising him of his constitutional rights and Kinney indicated he was “willing to waive those rights.” The officer asked Kinney if the weapon …
|
| 1 CA-CR 09-0496 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2010-09-30 |
—
|
State v. Chavez
|
|
… 1 . See State v. Girdler, 138 Ariz. 482, 488 , 675 P.2d 1301, 1307 (1983). 2 . Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). 3 . Chavez does not challenge on appeal the trial court’s admission of the response to …
|
| 1 CA-CR 009-0560 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2010-07-29 |
—
|
State v. Mendoza-Ruiz
|
|
… ity caretaker doctrine is “interchangeable” with the public safety exception to Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966), and therefore only relates to the admissibility of statements and not physical evidenc …
|
| CR-08-0098-AP |
Ariz. |
2010-07-01 |
—
|
State v. Villalobos
|
|
… 2 ¶5 Villalobos was taken to the police station and given Miranda warnings. Villalobos denied hitting Ashley, and a detective asked him to take a polygraph examination. Vil …
|
| 2 CA-CR 2009-0111 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2010-06-04 |
—
|
State of Arizona v. Jeffrey Lee Hinden
|
|
… out usurping the legislature‟s exclusive role in defining crimes. See State v. Miranda, 200 Ariz. 67, ¶ 5, 22 P.3d 506, 508 (2001) (defining crimes is legislature‟s function and “[c]ourts may not add elements to crimes defined by statute …
|
| CR-07-0301-AP |
Ariz. |
2010-02-24 |
—
|
State v. KUHS
|
|
… returned later that afternoon, he was arrested. ¶5 After being given Miranda warnings, Kuhs agreed to talk to the police and eventually confessed to the killing. Kuhs said that he went to Herrera’s apartment to c …
|
| CR-09-0189-PR |
Ariz. |
2010-02-12 |
—
|
State v. Diaz
|
|
… orted the trial court’s finding that defendant’s waiver of Miranda rights was knowing and voluntary). We will not reverse a conviction based on speculation o …
|
| 1 CA-CR 08-0715 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2010-01-21 |
—
|
State v. Pierce
|
|
… shotgun were fired. After Pierce was arrested, he was informed of his juvenile Miranda *571 3 rights, and agreed to an interview. He stated the plan was to take guns, money and “weed” from the victim’s house. He explained that his job was …
|
| CR-09-0188-PR |
Ariz. |
2010-01-15 |
—
|
State v. Guillen
|
|
… f an illegal arrest, the Court in Brown also considered whether the police gave Miranda warnings to be “an important factor.” 422 U.S. at 603. “Although Brown dealt with the exclusion of a defendant’s statements, [the reasoning in Brown] ap …
|
| 2 CA-CR 2009-0275-PR |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2010-01-14 |
—
|
State of Arizona v. Steven D. Szpyrka
|
|
… rt vacated the conviction, finding Szpyrka’s constitutional rights pursuant to Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), had been violated. State v. Szpyrka, 220 Ariz. 59, 202 P.3d 524 (App. 2008). In April 2008, Szpyrka filed a petition f …
|