State v. Corrales

How courts have described this case

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

• reversing a conviction because an incomplete record precluded the court from finding that jury communications were harmless
• reversing a conviction because an incomplete record precluded the court from finding that jury communications were harmless
• reversing because the jury’s note said they could not reach a decision and the judge replied that they should continue their deliberations but made no record of the exchange
• “The danger that the judge may not remember the events clearly, as demonstrated in the instant case, requires the making of a record in the presence of all parties.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

11 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. McDaniel
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1983-04-28· cited 135×
• State v. Christensen
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1981-04-14· cited 126×
• State v. Mata
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1980-03-11· cited 117×
• State v. Zuck
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1982-11-15· cited 115×
• Brown v. State
  Supreme Court of Minnesota· 2004-07-01· cited 22×
• State v. Hilliard
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1982-07-22· cited 15×
• State v. Martin
  Supreme Court of Minnesota· 2006-11-16· cited 12×
• State v. Benford
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1981-06-04· cited 8×
• State v. Roberts
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1981-07-14· cited 7×
• State v. Shumway
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1983-03-17· cited 2×
• State v. Mekeel
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2024-12-05· cited 1×

Cites

5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• State v. Burnetts
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1956-04-03· cited 43×
• State v. Robin
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1975-12-17· cited 27×
• State v. Werring
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1974-06-13· cited 25×
• State v. Davis
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1977-06-10· cited 18×
• State v. Streyar
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1978-05-31· cited 8×