Arizona Supreme Court· 5/24/2006

State v. Arellano

Citations

143 P.3d 1015
213 Ariz. 474
2006 Ariz. LEXIS 61

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

holding that because mental retardation is a static condition, “evidence of any skills or deficiencies in adaptive behavior exhibited by a defendant, even after age eighteen, helps determine whether a defendant has mental retardation”
holding that because mental retardation is a static condition, “evidence of any skills or deficiencies in adaptive behavior exhibited by a defendant, even after age eighteen, helps determine whether a defendant has mental retardation”
court of appeals can exercise special action jurisdiction to review issues concerning mental retardation proceedings in capital litigation
rebuttable presumption of intellectual dis ability 4 “vanishes” when state presents evidence intelligence quotient scores invalid or other evidence capital defendant not suffering from intellectual disability
“A trial judge usually will not exclude evidence as unduly prejudicial when the trial is to the court.”
“The provision [in § 13-753] requiring that symptoms of mental retardation occur before age eighteen applies to both elements of mental retardation: significantly subaverage intelligence and significantly impaired adaptive behavior.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Megregor, Berch, Ryan, Hurwitz, Bales

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

15 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

23 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

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.