Arizona Supreme Court· 8/10/2009

State v. Kiles

Citations

213 P.3d 174
222 Ariz. 25
562 Ariz. Adv. Rep. 3
2009 Ariz. LEXIS 254

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).

Judges: Ryan, Berch, Hurwitz, Bales, McGregor

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

19 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

62 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

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.