Arizona Supreme Court· 12/30/1929
MacIas v. State
Citations
- 283 P. 711
- 36 Ariz. 140
- 1929 Ariz. LEXIS 107
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that first degree murder requires proof that “a plan to murder was formed after the matter had been made a subject of deliberation and reflection”
- “In order that a killing shall be murder in the first degree ... it must be shown that a plan to murder was formed after the matter had been made a subject of deliberation and reflection....”
- \In order that a killing shall be murder in the first degree ... it must be shown that a plan to murder was formed after the matter had been made a subject of deliberation and reflection....\
- a man who is a trespasser and in a place where he has no right to be may not stand his ground and slay his assailant and still claim self-defense, when by leaving such place he might avoid the conflict
- a man who is a trespasser and in a place where he has no right to be may not stand his ground and slay his assailant and still claim self-defense, when by leaving such place he might avoid the conflict
- a man who is a trespasser and in a place where he has no right to be may not stand his ground and slay his assailant, and still claim self-defense, when by leaving such place he might avoid the conflict
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Lockwood
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
45 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- State v. DannArizona Supreme Court· 2009-05-19· cited 146×
- State v. SchrockArizona Supreme Court· 1986-03-31· cited 136×
- Sullivan v. State of ArizonaArizona Supreme Court· 1936-03-02· cited 92×
- State v. SingletonArizona Supreme Court· 1947-07-11· cited 87×
- State v. VickersArizona Supreme Court· 1989-01-31· cited 85×
- State v. McNairArizona Supreme Court· 1984-09-05· cited 82×
- State v. ThompsonArizona Supreme Court· 2003-03-12· cited 74×
- State v. EisensteinArizona Supreme Court· 1951-09-24· cited 53×
- State v. SnowdenIdaho Supreme Court· 1957-07-24· cited 52×
- State v. JustCourt of Appeals of Arizona· 1983-10-11· cited 51×
- State v. SantiagoCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2006-06-19· cited 49×
- State v. IntognaArizona Supreme Court· 1966-10-13· cited 44×
- State v. PreisArizona Supreme Court· 1961-06-14· cited 41×
- State v. BryantSupreme Court of South Carolina· 1999-08-16· cited 39×
- Robert Wayne Vickers v. James T. RickettsNinth Circuit· 1986-08-27· cited 37×
- Humphrey v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.Arizona Supreme Court· 1937-07-12· cited 36×
- State v. RiveraArizona Supreme Court· 1963-05-15· cited 34×
- State v. TuellArizona Supreme Court· 1975-10-27· cited 32×
- State v. LacqueyArizona Supreme Court· 1977-11-15· cited 31×
- State v. RamosArizona Supreme Court· 1972-01-13· cited 30×
Cites
13 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Lawrence v. StateArizona Supreme Court· 1925-11-06· cited 60×
- Dorsey v. StateArizona Supreme Court· 1923-03-31· cited 52×
- Crowell v. StateArizona Supreme Court· 1913-11-18· cited 36×
- Quong Yu v. Territory of ArizonaArizona Supreme Court· 1909-03-20· cited 22×
- Lenord v. StateArizona Supreme Court· 1913-12-30· cited 18×
- Encinas v. StateArizona Supreme Court· 1923-12-22· cited 16×
- Territory of Arizona v. DooleyArizona Supreme Court· 1889-03-14· cited 12×
- Anderson v. Territory of ArizonaArizona Supreme Court· 1904-03-26· cited 12×
- Foster v. Territory of ArizonaArizona Supreme Court· 1899-03-15· cited 11×
- Carter v. StateArizona Supreme Court· 1916-12-19· cited 10×
- La Grange v. StateArizona Supreme Court· 1924-01-24· cited 9×
- Murphy v. StateArizona Supreme Court· 1928-03-05· cited 5×
- Waddle v. StateArizona Supreme Court· 1924-11-03· cited 3×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.