State v. Cox

How courts have described this case

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

• forming of intent did not satisfy “overt act” requirement of former venue statute A.R.S. § 13-131

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

7 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Poland
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1982-04-13· cited 116×
• State v. Comer
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1990-07-31· cited 104×
• State v. Lambright
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1983-09-28· cited 96×
• State v. Agnew
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1982-04-21· cited 17×
• State v. Aussie
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1993-06-03· cited 7×
• Crittendon v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1976-10-11· cited 5×
• State v. Hester
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1985-03-19· cited 5×

Cites

11 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Hoffa v. United States
  Supreme Court· 1966-12-12· cited 2,107×
• People v. Abbott
  California Supreme Court· 1956-11-23· cited 105×
• State v. Mandel
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1954-12-28· cited 67×
• B.W.L. Sam v. State
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1928-03-19· cited 41×
• People v. Lee
  Michigan Supreme Court· 1952-06-27· cited 25×
• Addington v. State
  Supreme Court of Kansas· 1967-09-07· cited 16×
• Reynolds v. State
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1916-12-22· cited 8×
• State v. Faught
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1965-01-27· cited 7×
• State v. Graham
  Utah Supreme Court· 1901-03-12· cited 5×
• People v. Fair
  New York County Courts· 1969-07-25· cited 4×
• Baca v. Noyes-Norman Shoe Co.
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1916-12-22· cited 4×