| 1833 |
Ariz. |
1969-02-17 |
—
|
State v. Hickson
|
|
… es of Criminal Procedure 276; Singh v. State, 35 Ariz. 432 , 280 P. 672 (1929); Miranda v. State, 42 Ariz. 358 , 26 P.2d 241 (1933) ; Antone v. State, 49 Ariz. 168 , 65 P.2d 646 (1937).” In her own statement the appellant indicates that she …
|
| 1802 |
Ariz. |
1969-02-06 |
—
|
State v. Miranda
|
|
… on of rape and kidnapping, resulting from a retrial mandated by the decision of Miranda v. State of Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). In its second appearance before this Court, 1 2 there are ramifications of th …
|
| 1840 |
Ariz. |
1969-01-16 |
—
|
State v. Reynolds
|
|
… ional rights. Several witnesses testified that appellant was properly given the Miranda warning and he personally acknowledged in his statement that he was aware of his rights. The trial court found the statement to have been made voluntari …
|
| 2 CA-CR 131 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
1969-01-14 |
—
|
State v. Hess
|
|
… nal ground that she was not advised of her constitutional rights as required in Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). It is undisputed that defendant was not so advised at the time she was questioned by t …
|
| 1745 |
Ariz. |
1969-01-03 |
—
|
State v. Madden
|
|
… 6, 17 A.R.S.; Singh v. State, 35 Ariz. 432 , 280 P. 672 , 67 A.L.R. 129 (1929); Miranda v. State, 42 Ariz. 358 , 26 P.2d 241 (1933); Antone v. State, 49 Ariz. 168 , 65 P.2d 646 (1937). The State responds that manslaughter is not within the …
|
| 9426-PR |
Ariz. |
1968-12-27 |
—
|
McDowell v. Davis
|
|
… . Brand v. J. H. Rose Trucking Co., 102 Ariz. 201 , 427 P.2d 519 ; Stearnman v. Miranda, 97 Ariz. 55 , 396 P.2d 622 ; Alires v. Southern Pacific Co., 93 Ariz. 97 , 378 P.2d 913 ; Lyric Amusement Co. v. Jeffries, 58 Ariz. 381 , 120 P.2d 417 …
|
| 1 CA-CIV 594 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
1968-12-27 |
—
|
McDowell v. Davis
|
|
… iver Valley W. U. Assn. v. Cornum, 49 Ariz. 1 , 63 P.2d 639 (1937); Stearman v. Miranda, 97 Ariz. 55 , 396 P.2d 622 (1964); and Serrano v. Kenneth A. Ethridge Contracting Co., 2 Ariz.App. 473 , 409 P.2d 757 (1966). Likewise, a defendant can …
|
| 2 CA-CR 115 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
1968-12-13 |
—
|
State v. Zappia
|
|
… ygordobil, 89 Ariz. 161 , 359 P.2d 753 (1961), upon his detention at the scene, Miranda v. State of Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 , 10 A.L.R.3d 974 (1966). It is our view that the defendant by taking the witness sta …
|
| 1915 |
Ariz. |
1968-12-11 |
—
|
State v. Jennings
|
|
… e squad car as they drove to police headquarters. This advice consisted of the “Miranda warnings”, i. e. (1) the defendant has a right to remain silent; (2) anything the defendant says may be used against him in court; (3) the defendant has …
|
| 2 CA-CR 123 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
1968-11-27 |
—
|
State v. Dean
|
|
… to the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution as construed in Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). *514 The evidence before the trial court in the hearing out of the presence of the jur …
|
| 1764 |
Ariz. |
1968-11-20 |
—
|
State v. Bustamante
|
|
… is that the evidence does not support an instruction on first degree murder. In Miranda v. State, 42 Ariz. 358 , 26 P.2d 241 (1933) Justice Lockwood addressed himself to this problem: “It is the duty of the court, even in the absence of a r …
|
| 2 CA-CR 117 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
1968-11-13 |
—
|
State v. Pine
|
|
… artment, and at this time the defendant was served with the search warrant and “Miranda warnings” were given to him. The defendant, while outside the house with the officers, admitted that he had committed the two burglaries. Defendant gave …
|
| No. 9280-PR |
Ariz. |
1968-10-30 |
—
|
State v. Fassler
|
|
… obedo v. State of Illinois, 378 U.S. 478 , 84 S.Ct. 1758 , 12 L.Ed.2d 977 , and Miranda v. State of Ariz., 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 . The court stated: “You didn’t phrase your motion as being one for a mistrial, but if …
|
| 2 CA-CR 127 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
1968-10-29 |
—
|
State v. Stotts
|
|
… tective, who, previous to the interrogation, fully advised the defendant of his Miranda rights. At this interview, the defendant confessed to the crimes and informed the detective that items taken in the burglary could be recovered from two …
|
| 2 CA-CR 113 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
1968-10-24 |
—
|
State v. Hunt
|
|
… v. State of Illinois, 378 U.S. 478 , 84 S.Ct. 1758 , 12 L.Ed.2d 977 (1964), and Miranda v. State of Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966), since Hunt had not been apprised of his constitutional rights prior to the co …
|
| 1 CA-CIV 588 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
1968-06-12 |
—
|
Worthington v. Funk
|
|
… gence per se. Herzberg v. White, 49 Ariz. 313 , 66 P.2d 253 (1937); Stearman v. Miranda, 97 Ariz. 55 , 396 P.2d 622 (1964). Whether such statutory negligence in any way contributed to the ac'cident was also a question for the jury. Plaintif …
|
| 2 CA-CR 104 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
1968-06-07 |
—
|
State v. Perez
|
|
… right to remain silent and his right to counsel. We hold that the principles of Miranda v. State of Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966) do not operate to render these statements inadmissible. Defendant was detained …
|
| 1 CA-CR 140 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
1968-05-22 |
—
|
State v. McGriff
|
|
… 908 , 1 A.L.R.3d 1205 ; State v. Owen, 96 Ariz. 274 , 394 P.2d 206 (1964); and Miranda v. State of Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S. Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 , 10 A.L.R.3d 974 (1966). The court assigned as a basis for its refusal the fact tha …
|
| 9149 |
Ariz. |
1968-03-21 |
—
|
State v. Superior Court
|
|
… STRUCKMEYER, Justice. On June 27, 1963, respondent Ernest A. Miranda was convicted in Maricopa County of the crime of robbery and sentenced to a term of imprisonment in the Arizona State Prison. He appealed and we affirmed. State v. Miranda …
|
| No. 1 CA-CR 132 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
1968-03-07 |
—
|
State v. Fassler
|
|
… nation would in the view of the Court indicate that you waived any rights under Miranda and that you may have had something else in mind by way of cross examination that to you,, at least, might have been considered or deemed favorable to y …
|
| No. 1618 |
Ariz. |
1968-02-08 |
—
|
State v. Green
|
|
… trial of the instant case began on March 1, 1965, before the applicable date of Miranda v. State of Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 , the principles enunciated in Escobedo v. State of Illinois, 378 U.S. 478 , 84 S.Ct. …
|
| 1683 |
Ariz. |
1968-02-01 |
—
|
State v. Michael
|
|
… obedo v. State of Illinois, 378 U.S. 478 , 84 S.Ct. 1758 , 12 L.Ed.2d 977 , and Miranda v. State of Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 . The instant case was tried November 1, 1965, after Escobedo, supra, and before Mira …
|
| 2 CA-CR 93 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
1968-01-17 |
—
|
State v. Reynolds
|
|
… ective Bernal were wrongfully admitted in evidence under the rules laid down in Miranda v. State of Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). A short summary of the facts and the testimony of the defendant admitted in e …
|
| 9092-PR |
Ariz. |
1968-01-11 |
—
|
Application of Billie
|
|
… of retrospective application of the Supreme Court’s decisions in Escobedo 4 and Miranda, 5 The court held that its decisions in Escobedo and Miranda were applicable only to those cases in which trial began after the decisions were announced …
|
| 2 CA-HC 66 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
1968-01-11 |
—
|
Application of Billie
|
|
… v. State of Illinois, 378 U.S. 478 , 84 S.Ct. 1758 , 12 L.Ed.2d 977 (1964), and Miranda v. State of Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1968), relative to custodial interrogation were given prospective application only. …
|
| 2 CA-CR 97 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
1967-12-27 |
—
|
State v. Woody
|
|
… en the police discovered the goods in his closet, the defendant was warned, ala Miranda, and then asked if the goods were his, to which question he replied in the affirmative. When asked to explain how they were acquired, he refused to answ …
|
| No. 1749 |
Ariz. |
1967-12-06 |
—
|
State v. Forteson
|
|
… . The trial court on new trial will find its guidelines, in this particular, in Miranda v. State of Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 . Judgment reversed and new trial ordered. McFarland, V. C. J., and STRUCKMEYER, UDAL …
|
| 1723 |
Ariz. |
1967-12-06 |
—
|
State v. Clark
|
|
… ever, since the trial of this case began on March 31, 1966, the requirements of Miranda v. State of Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966), *553 are not controlling. The Supreme Court of the United States in Johnson v …
|
| 1761 |
Ariz. |
1967-11-29 |
—
|
State v. Saunders
|
|
… on July 11, 1966, the resolution of this' issue depends on an interpretation of Miranda v. State of Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). In Miranda the United States Supreme Court held in part that: “ * * * the pro …
|
| 2 CA-CR 102 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
1967-11-13 |
—
|
State v. Noriega
|
|
… ion of any constitutional rights of the defendant. Appellant relies entirely on Miranda v. State of Arizona, 384 U. S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). In fact, it is the only case cited in appellant’s brief. Miranda deals with …
|
| No. 1679 |
Ariz. |
1967-11-02 |
—
|
State v. Spencer
|
|
… case was originally tried on November 2, 1965, which was before the decision in Miranda v. State of Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 . In Johnson v. State of New Jersey, 384 U.S. 719 , 86 S.Ct. 1772 , 16 L.Ed.2d 882 , …
|
| 8991-PR |
Ariz. |
1967-11-02 |
—
|
State v. Hunter
|
|
… e of Illinois, 378 U.S. 478, 479 , 84 S.Ct. 1758 , 12 L.Ed.2d 977 . The case of Miranda v. State of Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 , is not applicable to the instant case in view of the United States Supreme Court’s …
|
| 1 CA-CIV 261 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
1967-10-03 |
—
|
Myers v. Rollette
|
|
… rpretation, then the action of the trial court was correct. Casey ; Stearman v. Miranda, 97 Ariz. 55 , 396 P.2d 622 (1964). There is no dispute in relation to some of the facts: Rollette and Myers jointly inspected the unpatented mining cla …
|
| 2 CA-CR 74 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
1967-09-26 |
—
|
State v. McFall
|
|
… 78 U.S. 478 , 84 S.Ct. 1758 , 12 L.Ed.2d 977 (1964), but not by the decision of Miranda v. State of Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966), as determined by the decision of Johnson v. State of New Jersey, 384 U.S. 719 …
|
| 1 CA-CR 120 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
1967-09-21 |
—
|
State v. Tellez
|
|
… s error to admit in evidence statements made by the defendant to the police. In Miranda v. State of Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966), the United States Supreme Court set forth certain statements of constitutiona …
|
| 1 CA-CIV 596 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
1967-08-09 |
—
|
Smith v. Goodman
|
|
… afeway Stores, Inc. v. Cone, 2 Ariz.App. 151 , 406 P.2d 869 (1966); Stearman v. Miranda, 97 Ariz. 55 , 396 P.2d 622 (1964). The defendant claims the plaintiff had assumed the risk by the fact he had knowingly continued to’ use the rope for …
|
| 1 CA-CR 124 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
1967-07-28 |
—
|
State v. Zaragosa
|
|
… 449 , 453. This statement .of the law has been followed in Arizona in State v. Miranda, 98 Ariz. 11 , *82 401 P.2d 716 (1965), citing with approval the case of People v. Gould, 54 Cal.2d 621 , 7 Cal.Rptr. 273 , 354 P.2d 865 (1960). In the …
|
| 8569 |
Ariz. |
1967-07-07 |
—
|
Harmon v. Szrama
|
|
… or likelihood that the conclusions of reasonable men would differ. Stearman v. Miranda, 97 Ariz. 55 , 396 P.2d 622 (1964). The family fight and La Verne’s taking refuge with the Harmons two years before the shooting incident, with complete …
|
| 2 CA-CR 65 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
1967-06-12 |
—
|
State v. Chaney
|
|
… oss-examination. State v. Taylor, 99 Ariz. 151 , 407 P.2d 106 (1965) ; State v. Miranda, 98 Ariz. 11 , 401 P.2d 716 (1965). The defendant contends these cases are distinguishable in that the party identified was the accused in the criminal …
|
| 1685 |
Ariz. |
1967-06-08 |
—
|
State v. Anderson
|
|
… without being informed of her constitutional right to remain silent. *298 While Miranda v. State of Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 was not yet decided at the time of the trial of the instant case, and while Johnson v …
|
| 1665 |
Ariz. |
1967-05-24 |
—
|
State v. Chambers
|
|
… obedo v. State of Illinois, 378 U.S. 478 , 84 S.Ct. 1758 , 12 L.Ed.2d 977 ; and Miranda v. State of Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 . In the case at bar, only Escobedo is controlling, as the trial was after the Escobe …
|
| 1 CA-CR 87 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
1967-05-17 |
—
|
State v. Juarez
|
|
… do v. State of Illinois, 378 U.S. 478 , 84 S.Ct. 1758 , 12 L.Ed.2d 977 (1964) ; Miranda v. State of Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). Rules and statutes are enacted for a purpose and are to be followed. Unless t …
|
| 7405 |
Ariz. |
1967-05-11 |
—
|
Brand v. JH Rose Trucking Company
|
|
… tted to the jury and not a question of law for the court; * * * ’ ” Stearman v. Miranda, 97 Ariz. 55, 59 , 396 P.2d 622, 625 , quoting Figueroa v. Majors, 85 Ariz. 345, 346-347 , 338 P.2d 803, 804 . (Emphasis supplied.) From the evidence pr …
|
| 1 CA-CIV 191 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
1967-05-05 |
—
|
Whitly v. Moore
|
|
… efore, be left undisturbed if reasonably supported by the evidence. Stearman v. Miranda, 97 Ariz. 55 , 396 P.2d 622 (1964) Young Candy & Tobacco Co. v. Montoya, 91 Ariz. 363 , 372 P.2d 703 (1962). Plaintiff’s automobile was struck from …
|
| No. 2 CA-CIV 292 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
1967-02-28 |
—
|
Garvey v. State
|
|
… v. State of Illinois, 378 U.S. 478 , 84 S.Ct. 1758 , 12 L.Ed.2d 977 (1964), and Miranda v. State of Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966), but as the conviction in the instant case (1963) was prior to the decisions i …
|
| 1 CA-CR 61 |
Ariz. Ct. App. |
1967-01-31 |
—
|
State v. Powell
|
|
… ect, holding that an affirmative request for counsel is required, were State v. Miranda, 98 Ariz. 18 , 401 P.2d 721 (1965); State v. Sherrick, 98 Ariz. 46 , 402 P.2d 1 (1965). The defendant speculated, and correctly so, that the whole matte …
|
| 1386 |
Ariz. |
1967-01-26 |
—
|
State v. Hudgens
|
|
… of Illinois, 378 U.S. 478 , 84 S.Ct. 1758 , 12 L.Ed.2d 977 (June 22, 1964), and Miranda v. State of Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (June 13, 1966), were not to be applied retroactively. The case at bar was tried and …
|
| 8057 |
Ariz. |
1967-01-25 |
—
|
Bullard v. Stonebraker
|
|
… usion that *586 negligence is ever a question of law for the court. Stearman v. Miranda, 97 Ariz. 55 , 396 P.2d 622 ; Figueroa v. Majors, 85 Ariz. 345 , 338 P.2d 803 ; Casey v. Beaudry Motor Co., 83 Ariz. 6 , 315 P.2d 662 . Cf. Sax v. Kopel …
|
| 1529 |
Ariz. |
1966-11-30 |
—
|
State v. Villegas
|
|
… to his conduct and statements made at the time of the identification. State v. Miranda, 98 Ariz. 11 , 401 P.2d 716 . Appellant next attacks the identification because made at a íine-up when only the accused were present in the line. He cit …
|
| 1621 |
Ariz. |
1966-11-30 |
—
|
State v. Foggy
|
|
… 84 S.Ct. 1758 , 12 L.Ed.2d 977 . The court in Escobedo, supra, as clarified in Miranda v. State of Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 , provided that once a suspect is subjected to custodial interrogation, i. e. denied …
|