State v. Phillips

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that “[i]n Ring III, we held ‘that the Sixth Amendment does not require a jury to determine prior convictions under sections 13-703 [ (F)(1) ] and [ (F)(2

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

4 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Roseberry
  Arizona Supreme Court· 2005-05-11· cited 59×
• State v. Murdaugh
  Arizona Supreme Court· 2004-09-15· cited 58×
• Michael Murdaugh v. Charles Ryan
  Ninth Circuit· 2013-07-26· cited 18×
• Arizona v. Phillips
  Supreme Court· 2003-11-03

Cites

8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Ring v. Arizona
  Supreme Court· 2002-06-24· cited 4,683×
• Enmund v. Florida
  Supreme Court· 1982-07-02· cited 2,349×
• State v. Ring
  Arizona Supreme Court· 2003-04-03· cited 325×
• State v. Fulminante
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1989-07-11· cited 146×
• State v. Harding
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1983-09-06· cited 111×
• State v. Rockwell
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1989-06-08· cited 74×
• State v. Phillips
  Arizona Supreme Court· 2002-05-24· cited 46×
• State v. Lee
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1996-05-21· cited 41×