| 1 CA-CR 23-0142 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2024-05-02 |
—
|
State v. Sandoval Beltran
|
|
… is motion to suppress statements he made to a police officer before receiving a Miranda1 warning and having a firearm seized from a vehicle. For the following reasons, we affirm. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND ¶2 …
|
| 1 CA-CR 22-0390 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2024-04-16 |
—
|
State v. Spink
|
|
… o assist Phoenix police in the investigation. While being read his rights under Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), he insisted that he was framed. He was taken to the Yavapai County Jail for an initial interview by Phoenix police befo …
|
| 1 CA-CV 23-0238 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2024-04-16 |
—
|
State v. Curry
|
|
… lice to report the altercation. Police took Curry into custody and read him his Miranda rights. See Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 439 (1966). Curry then told officers he had argued with his neighbor but denied possessing a gun during the alt …
|
| 1 CA-CR 22-0472 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2024-03-28 |
—
|
State v. Brown
|
|
… cause he could not answer a juror’s question about whether he had been read his Miranda rights. Brown contends he was not read his Miranda rights and the jury was told about statements he made during his arrest. ¶20 Brown has wai …
|
| 1 CA-CR 23-0119 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2024-03-14 |
—
|
State v. Prall
|
|
… erable. Afterward, the deputy detained Prall in his patrol car and read him his Miranda2 rights. ¶6 A grand jury indicted Prall on two counts of aggravated assault using a simulated deadly weapon, each a class 3 felony. After a …
|
| 1 CA-CR 22-0600 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2024-01-23 |
—
|
State v. Dennis Hyde
|
|
… but told him that he was being detained. They did not read him his rights under Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966). Hyde then questioned why he was being detained and argued with one of the officers. The other officer de-escalated the …
|
| 1 CA-CR 22-0386 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2024-01-09 |
—
|
State v. Marinakis
|
|
… gurney. ¶9 After obtaining a warrant, an officer read Marinakis his Miranda rights and obtained a blood sample. Marinakis was then released from the hospital and officers transported him to jail. ¶10 Officers remained …
|
| 1 CA-CV 22-0553-FC |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2023-12-19 |
—
|
State v. Davitt
|
|
… call. See Deng, 1 CA-CR 15-0638, at *3, ¶ 12 (“[defendant] was not entitled to Miranda warnings because during the phone call he was not in custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of action.”); State v. Fulminante, 161 Ariz. 237, 246 …
|
| 1 CA-CR 22-0602 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2023-11-30 |
—
|
State v. Stura
|
|
… , and after thirty minutes of further questioning, the detective read Stura her Miranda rights. The detective continued to interrogate Stura for about two more hours, when Stura altered her account and confessed to having shot the victim. …
|
| 1 CA-CR 22-0537 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2023-11-14 |
—
|
State v. Strover
|
|
… mpt to prevent apprehension . . . .”), disapproved on other grounds by State v. Miranda, 200 Ariz. 67, 69, ¶ 5 (2001). ¶22 Nonetheless, Strover maintains the evidence was insufficient because the State presented no eyewitness te …
|
| 1 CA-CR 22-0346 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2023-11-07 |
—
|
State v. Miranda
|
|
… ee, v. RICARDO ADOLPHO MIRANDA, Appellant. No. 1 CA-CR 22-0346 FILED 11-7-2023 Appeal from the Superior Court …
|
| 1 CA-CR 22-0289 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2023-10-26 |
—
|
State v. Lewis
|
|
… ff the highway to a location away from traffic, Munoz read Lewis his rights per Miranda.1 Lewis agreed to answer questions and disclosed that he had recently taken tramadol and used medical marijuana. Detective Houchens then asked Lewis if …
|
| 1 CA-CV 22-0302-FC |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2023-10-12 |
—
|
State v. Osgood
|
|
… own to the police department.” At the police station, Osgood was advised of his Miranda rights and interviewed. Osgood admitted to using screen names associated with the NCMEC reports, including “Gent” and others. Osgood made other incrimin …
|
| 1 CA-CR 22-0499 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2023-10-03 |
—
|
State v. Jimenez
|
|
… written, “Adderall 150 out of 1,000—300 trip.” ¶4 After receiving a Miranda advisement, Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), E.Z. said the Adderall in the duffle bag was his, he did not have a prescription for it, he had bou …
|
| 1 CA-CR 21-0343 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2023-08-10 |
—
|
State v. Jaynes
|
|
… t, 196 Ariz. 567, 570, ¶ 12 (App. 1999), overruled on other grounds by State v. Miranda, 200 Ariz. 67, 68-69, ¶¶ 4-5 11 STATE v. JAYNES Decisi …
|
| 1 CA-CR 20-0066 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2023-07-25 |
—
|
State v. Melendez
|
|
… ¶5 After Melendez was taken into custody, a detective read him his Miranda rights. See Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 467–73, 479 (1966). The detective explained that she wanted to get Melendez’s “side of the story.” She the …
|
| 1 CA-CR 22-0151 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2023-06-29 |
—
|
State v. Moreno
|
|
… Phoenix, near the crime scene less than an hour later; and (3) the bag 5 Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966). 3 STATE v. MORENO …
|
| 1 CA-CR 22-0304 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2023-05-25 |
—
|
State v. Anderson
|
|
… 196 Ariz. 567, 570, ¶ 12 (App. 1999), disapproved on other grounds by State v. Miranda, 200 Ariz. 67, 69, ¶ 5 (2001). Evidence that the defendant departed the crime scene is not necessary to justify a flight instruction; evidence that the …
|
| 1 CA-JV 22-0136 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2023-05-04 |
—
|
State v. Williams
|
|
… lesser-included offense of aggravated assault as charged in this case. State v. Miranda, 200 Ariz. 67, 68, ¶ 3 (2001); State v. Angle, 149 Ariz. 478, 479 (1986). The State argues that this line of cases has been impliedly overruled by Carte …
|
| 1 CA-CR 22-0483-PRPC |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2023-04-25 |
—
|
State v. Estevez
|
|
… ng inferences, it supports giving the lesser-included instruction. See State v. Miranda, 200 Ariz. 67, 69, ¶ 7 (2001). ¶25 The superior court declined to instruct on reckless manslaughter because it found “no evidence of any reckle …
|
| CV-21-0277-PR |
Ariz. |
2023-04-19 |
—
|
Advanced Property Tax v. Jorge Othon and Spouse
|
|
… of the court.” Preston v. Denkins, 94 Ariz. 214, 222 (1963); see also Lown v. Miranda, 34 Ariz. 32, 36 (1928). “The jurisdiction of the court to enter any judgment must rest on the affidavit in support of service by publication.” Presto …
|
| 1 CA-CR 21-0561 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2023-04-18 |
—
|
State v. Lohmeier
|
|
… with intent to disturb the peace . . . or with knowledge of doing so.” State v. Miranda, 200 Ariz. 67, 69, ¶ 5 (2001) (quotation omitted). In so concluding, the court rejected the proposition that Section 13-2904(A)(6) “requires a finding t …
|
| 2 CA-CR 2022-0084 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2023-04-10 |
—
|
State of Arizona v. George Willie Rios
|
|
… he trial court abused its discretion in denying his motion to suppress based on Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966). He further argues that the Miranda advisory was inadequate because it stated only that he had the right to “the presenc …
|
| 1 CA-CV 21-0190 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2023-03-28 |
—
|
State v. Kemp
|
|
… ope” in a headphones case near the truck’s center console. Molina read Kemp his Miranda2 rights, and then continued questioning him. Meanwhile, Detective Reed searched the truck, finding what was determined to be approximately 27.4 grams of …
|
| 1 CA-CR 21-0489 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2023-03-09 |
—
|
State v. Sy
|
|
… e third motion to suppress, Sy moved to suppress statements based on an alleged Miranda2 violation. For the first time, the superior court advised Sy of his right to testify at a suppression hearing as provided under Arizona Rule of Crimina …
|
| 1 CA-CR 21-0438 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2023-03-02 |
—
|
State v. Wanna
|
|
… d several pieces of tin foil. After being advised of his rights consistent with Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 426 (1966), Wanna admitted to using the tin foil and straws to smoke heroin. ¶3 The state charged Wanna with (1) posse …
|
| 1 CA-CR 22-0159 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2023-02-14 |
—
|
State v. Morales
|
|
… perior court should have suppressed statements Morales made in the absence of a Miranda1 warning while being transported to a police station. Because Morales did not make those spontaneous statements during a custodial interrogation, and th …
|
| 1 CA-CR 21-0577 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2023-01-03 |
—
|
State v. Zavala
|
|
… e warrant, placed him in a patrol car and advised him of his rights pursuant to Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966). While performing a search incident to arrest, the officers found a digital scale in Zavala’s pocket with a “white flaky …
|
| 2 CA-CR 2021-0021 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2022-11-10 |
—
|
State of Arizona v. Brian Matthew MacHardy
|
|
… ea equipped with a padded bench and a table and read him his rights pursuant to Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966). MacHardy sat there, still handcuffed, for the duration of the interview, which lasted less than an hour. During the int …
|
| 1 CA-CR 21-0432 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2022-10-27 |
—
|
State v. Law
|
|
… t John Bounds for assistance. The officers placed Law under arrest and read her Miranda rights. ¶7 Deputy Hearl conducted a cursory search of Law’s person at the scene. Deputy Hearl informed Law that a full search would be cond …
|
| 1 CA-CR 21-0586 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2022-09-15 |
—
|
State v. Snow
|
|
… Snow and, while waiting for backup, advised him of his rights under Arizona v. Miranda, 384 U.S. 436 (1966). The deputy had a body-worn camera that recorded the entire interaction. Three more law enforcement officers arrived and, after ent …
|
| 1 CA-CR 21-0181 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2022-09-06 |
—
|
State v. Cardwell
|
|
… ntains the military’s version of the constitutional-rights advisory required by Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), he agreed to answer questions. Cardwell told the agents: (1) when he saw that Cara had …
|
| 1 CA-CR 21-0228 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2022-08-18 |
—
|
State v. White
|
|
… d his motions to continue the trial and suppress his statements to police under Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966). Finding no reversible error, we affirm. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY ¶2 White was riding …
|
| 1 CA-CR 21-0191 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2022-06-21 |
—
|
State v. Dann
|
|
… 18 At the outset of the third interview, the detective read Dann the Miranda warnings, and Dann stated that he understood his rights. The 2 detective then told Dann that he had DNA test results from the minor witnes …
|
| 1 CA-CR 21-0238 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2022-05-19 |
—
|
State v. Horak
|
|
… ed Horak after obtaining written statements from S.H., A.S., and D.S. Following Miranda warnings, Horak admitted to some of the events during the slumber party, but he denied hitting S.H. and said he was entitled to “discipline [S.H.] whene …
|
| 1 CA-CR 21-0419 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2022-05-17 |
—
|
State v. Stewart
|
|
… as a “hide-a-can.” ¶3 During a recorded police interview following Miranda1 warnings, Stewart initially denied knowledge of the contraband but eventually admitted he had purchased two ounces of methamphetamine in Tucson for $45 …
|
| 1 CA-CR 21-0207 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2022-05-10 |
—
|
State v. White
|
|
… rrant and found White inside a trailer on the property. After Cortez gave him a Miranda1 warning, White admitted to “selling a small amount of drugs here and there” and told Cortez about some methamphetamine in the trailer. In the trailer, …
|
| 1 CA-CR 21-0365 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2022-05-05 |
—
|
State v. Munoz
|
|
… earm. Nothing in the record indicates any of the officers informed Munoz of his Miranda rights before Lindo’s questioning. Munoz responded that someone else owned the handgun, that he had only possessed it for one day, and that he knew his …
|
| 1 CA-CR 21-0317 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2022-03-31 |
—
|
State v. Tanner
|
|
… e also argued any statements made during the stop were involuntary and violated Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966). ¶8 After an evidentiary hearing, the superior court partially denied Tanner’s suppression motion. The sup …
|
| 1 CA-CR 21-0222 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2022-02-24 |
—
|
State v. Missell
|
|
… ug paraphernalia associated with methamphetamine use. After Mathis read him his Miranda rights, Missell admitted he used methamphetamine earlier that day. He also admitted he had some methamphetamine under his table. ¶4 The supe …
|
| 1 CA-CR 21-0216 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2022-02-17 |
—
|
State v. Mills
|
|
… After taking Mills into custody and reading him his rights pursuant to Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), DPS questioned Mills at the house and the Mohave County Jail. Mills admitted that the guns found in the gun safe belong …
|
| 1 CA-CR 21-0032 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2022-02-10 |
—
|
State v. McKenna
|
|
… icle and discovered seven unfired 12-gauge shotgun shells. After being read his Miranda rights, McKenna stated he was a prohibited possessor and that his prints would probably be on the gun because he handled it earlier at an acquaintance’s …
|
| 1 CA-CR 20-0100 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2022-01-18 |
—
|
State v. Woods
|
|
… juana. The trooper then stopped the inventory process. Woods was advised of his Miranda rights and told about the approximately 40 pounds of marijuana found in his vehicle. The tow truck was canceled, and one of the troopers drove Woods’ SU …
|
| 1 CA-CR 21-0093 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2022-01-18 |
—
|
State v. Jordan
|
|
… Decision of the Court the tests, he arrested Jordan and read him his Miranda1 rights. The officer, who had trained as a drug-recognition expert, then asked Jordan whether he had consumed methamphetamine; Jordan replied that it ha …
|
| 1 CA-CR 20-0464 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2021-12-30 |
—
|
State v. Mason
|
|
… t, 196 Ariz. 567, 570, ¶ 12 (App. 1999), overruled on other grounds by State v. Miranda, 200 Ariz. 67, 68– 69, ¶¶ 4–5 (2001). Whether the court should give a flight instruction is determined by the facts of the particular case. Id. “What th …
|
| 1 CA-CR 21-0082 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2021-12-16 |
—
|
State v. Douglas
|
|
… ping Douglas safely leave the apartment, officers detained him and read him his Miranda rights. Douglas acknowledged those rights and continued to answer officers’ questions. ¶4 During questioning, Douglas claimed an unknown in …
|
| 1 CA-CR 21-0144 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2021-11-02 |
—
|
State v. Seda
|
|
… o found a handgun in the lot where Seda fled. After being arrested and read his Miranda rights, Seda admitted to possessing the drugs and handgun. ¶4 The State charged Seda with possession or use of dangerous drugs and misconduct …
|
| 1 CA-CR 21-0146 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2021-10-07 |
—
|
State v. Halterman
|
|
… ves interviewed Halterman at his home. Before the detectives gave Halterman his Miranda3 rights, he admitted sending the pictures and video. He also shared that he knew Ariana was 15 years old. After being advised of his rights, Halterman w …
|
| 1 CA-CR 20-0134 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2021-08-12 |
—
|
State v. Aldana
|
|
… rview, which he asserts was part of a “two-stage” interrogation in violation of Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966) and Missouri v. Seibert, 542 U.S. 600 (2004). The State cross-appeals from the imposed sentence, arguing that the trial …
|
| 1 CA-CR 20-0528 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
2021-07-22 |
—
|
State v. Glasscock
|
|
… Glasscock back to the Glendale city jail for processing. After reading him his Miranda rights, Officer Kline interviewed Glasscock. During the interview, Officer Kline told Glasscock “You know you’re not supposed to possess certain weapons …
|