State v. McDaniel

How courts have described this case

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

• “if the trial judge has excluded testimony which would clearly show bias, interest, favor, hostility, prejudice, promise or hope of reward, it is error”
• reversing capital conviction based on defendant’s supplemental pro se argument
• reversing capital conviction based on defendant's supplemental pro se argument
• reversing capital conviction based on defendant’s supplemental pro se argument

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

12 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. McDaniel
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1983-04-28· cited 135×
• State v. Richmond
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1983-05-12· cited 95×
• State v. McKinney
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1996-05-16· cited 94×
• State v. Valencia
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1982-04-13· cited 58×
• State v. Leslie
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1985-10-09· cited 54×
• Montgomery v. Sheldon
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1995-04-04· cited 54×
• State v. McElyea
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1981-10-01· cited 20×
• State v. Leslie
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1983-07-05· cited 9×
• State v. Moreno
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1986-12-16· cited 9×
• Campbell v. Superior Court
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1994-05-03· cited 5×
• State v. Winegardner
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2017-05-31· cited 1×
• State v. Jordan
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1985-03-19

Cites

6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Pointer v. Texas
  Supreme Court· 1965-04-05· cited 4,761×
• State v. Watson
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1978-07-20· cited 206×
• State v. Gretzler
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1980-04-21· cited 92×
• State v. Holden
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1960-05-11· cited 48×
• State v. Dunlap
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1980-02-25· cited 35×
• State v. Morales
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1978-10-30· cited 31×