Arizona Supreme Court· 1/9/1985

State v. Nash

Citations

694 P.2d 222
143 Ariz. 392
1985 Ariz. LEXIS 149

How courts have described this case

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

ruling counsel’s actions did not prejudice defendant because of flexibility afforded counsel to act for “valid tactical reasons”
ruling counsel’s actions did not prejudice defendant because of flexibility afforded counsel to act for “valid tactical reasons”
holding that application of a \grave risk of death to another\ aggravator was warranted when a murderer shot a coin shop clerk, pointed the gun at another clerk without firing it, and then shot the first clerk several more times before fleeing
acknowledging that “advanced age” could be a mitigating factor, but determining, under the facts of the case, that the defendant’s age (67) did “not warrant leniency”
holding “[b]ecause specific intent to commit murder is irrelevant to a felony-murder charge,” no abuse of discretion in excluding expert testimony defendant “acted in self-defense caused by paranoid delusions”
allowing the State to submit reports from psychologists the defense could not cross-examine for the purpose of rebutting his mitigation evidence

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Gordon, Holohan, Hays, Cameron, Feldman

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

130 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

55 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.