State v. Kiles

How courts have described this case

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

• rejecting argument under former § 13-503 that defendant “may not have reflected on his decision to [kill the victim] because he was voluntarily intoxicated”
• explaining \that the decision of an appellate court in a case is the law of the case ... and no question necessarily involved and decided\ will be reconsidered
• explaining “that the decision of an appellate court in a case is the law of the case ... and no question necessarily involved and decided” will be reconsidered
• explaining 3 that under § 13–503 voluntary intoxication is not a defense to a charge that defendant 4 murdered the victim knowingly and with premeditation
• rejecting claim of complete deprivation of counsel under Cronic, reasoning “[t]he most that can be said is that there were delays [in appointment of counsel] and allegations of poor professional conduct.”
• finding no fundamental error in prosecutor’s arguments “that the time required to actually premeditate could be ‘instantaneous,’ ” because “he made clear that such was not the case in this matter [and h]is argument focused on the circumstantial evidence of premeditation”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).