Source: http://www.azcourts.gov/coa1/Decisions/Opinions/Criminal
Timestamp: 2017-09-24 06:48:43
Document Index: 670797613

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 13', '§ 13', '§ 13', '§ 13', '§ 13', '§ 13', '§ 13', '§ 13', '§ 13']

CourTools Performance Measures and Reports
Subscribe to Opinion Notifications
AZ State Courts
Home / Decisions / Opinions / Criminal
Is A.R.S. § 13-804(D), which provides that a convicted person’s restitution payments to the
clerk of the court shall not be stayed if the defendant files a notice of appeal, unconstitutional
because it conflicts with Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 31.6, which stays a sentence
to pay restitution pending appeal?
November 9, 2006 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CR 05-0733 . . . . . . . . . . . State v. McIntosh
1. Did the trial court err by denying defendant’s motion to suppress as untimely?
2. Should this court adopt the “rescue doctrine” or “private safety exception” to Miranda? If so, did defendant’s admission meet the standard of admissibility under this doctrine?
3. Was defendant’s confession voluntary?
October 31, 2006 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CR 04-0508 . . . . . . . . . . . . State v. Price
If a court finds only mitigating factors and no aggravating factors, is the court obliged to impose a
sentence that is lesser than the presumptive sentence?
Has the defendant met his burden of showing fundamental error in sentencing him when one of three aggravating factors should not have been used?
May 18, 2006 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CR 04-0530 . . . . . . . . . . . State v. Booker
2. Were additional statements made by the victim to an investigating police officer "testimonial" for Confrontation Clause purposes under Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004)?
March 23, 2006 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CR 04-0661 . . . . . . . . . . . . State v. Gastelum
1. Does Blakely apply retroactively to cases on collateral review whether such cases were final before or after Apprendi was decided?
2. Is Petitioner’s counsel ineffective for failing to raise an Apprendi claim on direct appeal?
March 25, 2005 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CR 04-0027 . . . . . . . . . . . State v. Storholm
Is a defendant sentenced for attempted child molestation, following revocation of his probation, entitled to presentence incarceration credit under A.R.S. § 13-709(B) for time spent detained at the Arizona State Hospital on probable cause that he is a sexually violent person (SVP)?
February 22, 2005 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CR 03-0187 PRPC . . . . . . . State v. Goracke
1. Is Blakely error waived if not raised in the superior court?
2. Does a single proper aggravating factor permit affirmance of an aggravated sentence even when the sentencing judge relied on improper factors?
3. Was the reliance on improper aggravating factors harmless error?
January 11, 2005 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CR 02-0591 . . . . . . . . . State v. Barraza
Is a separate jury finding of dangerousness required by Blakely for arson of an occupied structure when dangerousness rests on the use of fire as a dangerous instrument?
December 14, 2004 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CR 03-0243 . . . . . . . . . . . State v. Berger
June 22, 2004 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CR 03-0606 . . . . . . . . . . . . .State v. Nguyen
How does A.R.S. § 13-604.02(B), requiring consecutive sentences for new crimes committed while on probation, interact with Arizona's statutory and constitutional provision for a twelve-person jury
Is it reversible error to permit an accomplice witness who has entered a plea agreement containing a consistency clause to testify at trial under the belief that the consistency provision is enforceable?
March 23, 2004 . . . . . . . . . . . . . CR 02-0739 .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . State v. Lucero
1. Are results produced by GC/MS (gas chromatography/mass spectrometry) testing subject to a Frye
Are travel-related expenses incurred by the victim of a crime who voluntarily attends the
the defendant's trial an item of "economic loss" for which the victim is entitled to receive
pursuant to A.R.S. § 13-603(C)?
March 4, 2004 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CR 02-0222 , , , , , , , , , State v. Vogel
the use of physical force in self-defense by a defendant against whom the victim has committed
previous acts of domestic violence?
February 3, 2004 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CR 02-0960 . . . . . . . . . State v. Long
May a person be convicted of attempted second-degree murder under Arizona Law if he
knows merely that his conduct will cause serious physical injury and does not intend or know
of the same victim on another occasion be given consecutive, rather than concurrent, sentences
under A.R.S. § 13-604.01(K)?
2. Must a trial court conduct an inquiry into the basis of allegations that a change of
counsel is needed?
Whether a defendant can make a reasoned decision whether to testify and face
impeachment with a prior conviction when the trial court improperly sanitizes the
1. May PowerPoint presentation software be utilized in an opening statement,
notwithstanding the absence of authority for same in Rule 19, Arizona Rules of Criminal
March 12, 2003....................................CR02-0431RT...............................State v.
Does the burden shifting provision of A.R.S. § 13-205(A) apply to the defense of justification-crime prevention under § 13-411(A) when considered in light of the exemption in § 13-205(B) that pertains to the presumption under § 13-411(C)?
May 30, 2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .CR 01-0605 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . State v. Sorkhabi
Did the trial court err by denying defendant's motion to dismiss a prospective juror for cause?
September 18, 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CR 00-0522 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .State v. Roman