Arizona Supreme Court· 7/25/1980
State v. Clark
Citations
- 616 P.2d 888
- 126 Ariz. 428
- 1980 Ariz. LEXIS 248
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- finding unpersuasive any argument that (F)(5) factor applies only in murder for hire case and noting its applicability to any murder committed for any form of financial gain
- senseless killings of former friends and co-workers, “totally without regard for human life” found depraved
- senseless killings of former friends and co-workers, \totally without regard for human life\ found depraved
- A.R.S. § 13-703(F)(6) found where defendant killed employers who had given him “a break” after he was released from a juvenile home
- defendant murdered four people and \kept a spent bullet as a grisly souvenir of his crime\
- defendant murdered four people and “kept a spent bullet as a grisly souvenir of his crime”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Holohan, Gordon, Struckmeyer, Hays, Cameron
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
129 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Lewis v. JeffersSupreme Court· 1990-08-30· cited 1,972×
- Walton v. ArizonaSupreme Court· 1990-08-30· cited 1,614×
- State v. NewellArizona Supreme Court· 2006-04-26· cited 376×
- State v. GretzlerArizona Supreme Court· 1983-01-06· cited 374×
- Poland v. ArizonaSupreme Court· 1986-05-05· cited 338×
- State v. NashArizona Supreme Court· 1985-01-09· cited 279×
- State v. Amaya-RuizArizona Supreme Court· 1990-12-14· cited 276×
- State v. GilliesArizona Supreme Court· 1983-03-01· cited 219×
- State v. JeffersArizona Supreme Court· 1983-01-24· cited 217×
- State v. AdamsonArizona Supreme Court· 1983-04-11· cited 201×
- John Harvey Adamson v. James G. Ricketts, Director, Arizona Department of CorrectionsNinth Circuit· 1988-12-22· cited 192×
- Woodward v. StateMississippi Supreme Court· 1997-12-18· cited 192×
- State v. Soto-FongArizona Supreme Court· 1996-11-19· cited 182×
- State v. TisonArizona Supreme Court· 1981-07-09· cited 175×
- State v. McDonaldSupreme Court of Missouri· 1983-11-22· cited 175×
- State v. HydeArizona Supreme Court· 1996-07-09· cited 167×
- State v. McCallArizona Supreme Court· 1983-11-09· cited 164×
- State v. GreeneArizona Supreme Court· 1998-10-20· cited 158×
- State v. CorrellArizona Supreme Court· 1986-01-28· cited 157×
- State v. ChewSupreme Court of New Jersey· 1997-06-26· cited 147×
Cites
36 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Witherspoon v. IllinoisSupreme Court· 1968-06-03· cited 4,818×
- Brewer v. WilliamsSupreme Court· 1977-05-16· cited 2,626×
- Adams v. TexasSupreme Court· 1980-06-25· cited 1,718×
- Alford v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1931-02-24· cited 1,352×
- Smith v. IllinoisSupreme Court· 1968-01-29· cited 763×
- State v. RichmondArizona Supreme Court· 1976-12-20· cited 250×
- State v. WatsonArizona Supreme Court· 1978-07-20· cited 206×
- Broncucia v. ColoradoSupreme Court· 1977-06-27· cited 188×
- State v. KnappArizona Supreme Court· 1977-03-09· cited 183×
- Winters v. BohanonSupreme Court· 1974-02-19· cited 150×
- State v. MataArizona Supreme Court· 1980-03-11· cited 117×
- State v. SmithArizona Supreme Court· 1979-07-26· cited 93×
- State v. CejaArizona Supreme Court· 1980-05-19· cited 92×
- United States v. Eugene L. SmaldoneTenth Circuit· 1973-08-31· cited 83×
- State v. LujanArizona Supreme Court· 1979-11-26· cited 80×
- State v. DossArizona Supreme Court· 1977-07-07· cited 78×
- State v. BaumannArizona Supreme Court· 1980-03-26· cited 72×
- State v. FlemingArizona Supreme Court· 1977-11-01· cited 67×
- State v. BojorquezArizona Supreme Court· 1975-05-05· cited 62×
- State v. BlazakArizona Supreme Court· 1977-01-20· cited 56×
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.