Court of Appeals of Arizona· 8/30/2005

State v. Molina

Citations

118 P.3d 1094
211 Ariz. 130
459 Ariz. Adv. Rep. 5
2005 Ariz. App. LEXIS 106

How courts have described this case

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

recognizing that defendants who fail to object at trial “do not, strictly speaking, ‘waive’ their claims,” but “forfeit the right to obtain appellate relief unless they prove that fundamental error occurred”
finding superior court did not double count facts used to meet the elements of the offense to impose an aggravated sentence
finding no error in the trial court’s consideration of defendant’s lack of remorse to counter his claim he was “sorry for the [victim’s] injuries” and took responsibility after he told the presentence interviewer he was the victim because he was not guilty
fundamental error review applies to alleged sentencing 5 error based on grounds not urged in trial court
Blakely-exempt aggravating factors need be supported only by reasonable evidence in the record
fundamental Blakely error is prejudicial “if a reasonable jury, applying the appropriate standard of proof, under the actual standards of a jury trial, could have reached a different result than did the trial judge”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Eckerstrom, Brammer, Flórez

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

13 cases in this archive cite this case.

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.