State v. Smith
| Docket Number | CR-18-0295-AP |
| Decision Date | 04 November 2020 |
The Supreme Court affirmed Defendant's convictions and sentences for first-degree murder and child abuse, holding that no prejudicial error occurred during the trial proceedings
Specifically, the Supreme Court held (1) the trial court did not err in denying Defendant's motion to suppress; (2) the trial court did not violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by admitting a pretrial identification of Defendant; (3) the trial court did not err in denying Defendant's Batson...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
34 cases
-
State v. Reaves
...at 172, 125 S.Ct. 2410. ¶16 If "the reasons provided by the State are clearly pretextual," the strike cannot stand. State v. Smith , 250 Ariz. 69, ¶ 67, 475 P.3d 558 (2020) (quoting State v. Roque , 213 Ariz. 193, ¶ 15, 141 P.3d 368 (2006) ). For instance, "[i]f a prosecutor's proffered rea......
-
State v. Robinson
...for each strike, and (3) the trial court must determine whether the [defendant] proved purposeful racial discrimination." Smith , 250 Ariz. at 86 ¶ 63, 475 P.3d at 575 (quoting State v. Medina , 232 Ariz. 391, 404 ¶ 44, 306 P.3d 48, 61 (2013) ). Our inquiry here focuses on the third step. W......
-
State v. Allen
...the defendant's character, propensities or record and any of the circumstances of the offense." § 13-751(G) ; State v. Smith , 250 Ariz. 69, 95 ¶ 118, 475 P.3d 558, 584 (2020).1. Comments on Video Clips ¶191 First, Sammantha argues that the State violated Lockett and Eddings by emphasizing ......
-
State v. Vargas
...error, we need not consider if the individual acts collectively amount to ‘persistent and pervasive misconduct.’ " State v. Smith , 250 Ariz. 69, ¶ 146, 475 P.3d 558 (2020) (quoting State v. Escalante-Orozco , 241 Ariz. 254, ¶ 91, 386 P.3d 798 (2017) ); see State v. Bocharski , 218 Ariz. 47......
Get Started for Free
3 books & journal articles
-
1.3
...obtained by subpoena. The court declined the defendant’s request to find greater protection under Arizona Constitution.); State v. Smith, 250 Ariz. 69, 475 P.3d 558 (2020), cert. denied, 20-6990, 2021 WL 1240961 (2021) (suppression was not warranted under Art. 2 § 8, noting that although th......
-
6.1
...CSLI, we affirm the district court’s application of the Fourth Amendment’s good-faith exception.”) (citing Krull, supra); State v. Smith, 250 Ariz. 69, 475 P.3d 558 (2020), cert. denied, 20-6990, 2021 WL 1240961 (U.S. 2021) (The “good-faith exception applies here,” where state officer obtai......
-
3.1.8
...distinguishing Carpenter). See § 3.1.12, “Computers & Peer-to-Peer Networks/IP Addresses/ Social Media Accounts.” In State v. Smith, 250 Ariz. 69, 475 P.3d 558 (2020), cert. denied, 141 S. Ct. 2472 (2021), the defendant was indicted for first-degree murder and child abuse. The state obtaine......
