State v. D'AMBROSIO

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing a Rule 32 petitioner is entitled to an evidentiary hearing if he or she presents a colorable claim
• recognizing a PCR petitioner must present a colorable claim to be entitled to an evidentiary hearing
• noting defendant is entitled to an evidentiary hearing if he or she presents a colorable claim.
• noting a defendant who presents a colorable claim is entitled to an evidentiary hearing
• a PCR petitioner must present a colorable claim to be entitled to an evidentiary hearing
• “A decision as to whether a petition for post-conviction relief presents a colorable claim is, to some extent, a discretionary decision for the trial court.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

8 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State of Arizona v. Phil Gutierrez
  Arizona Supreme Court· 2012-06-27· cited 915×
• State v. Wagstaff
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1988-07-07· cited 96×
• People v. Johnson
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1992-03-27· cited 43×
• State v. McCall
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1989-03-07· cited 41×
• State v. Vickers
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1994-12-06· cited 23×
• State v. Rosas
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1995-03-21· cited 18×
• State of Arizona v. Phillip Gregory Speers
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2015-11-02· cited 8×
• State v. Chairez
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2013-06-17· cited 6×

Cites

5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• State v. Nash
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1985-01-09· cited 279×
• State v. Adamson
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1983-04-11· cited 201×
• State v. Schrock
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1986-03-31· cited 136×
• Commonwealth v. Burton
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1980-07-03· cited 74×
• State v. D'Ambrosio
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1986-08-26· cited 2×