State v. Puga

How courts have described this case

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

• “Our supreme court advised that courts should not pursue rote, unequivocal assurances of impartiality to rehabilitate prospective jurors. But when a prospective juror gives unclear or qualified answers of impartiality, Rule 18.5 authorizes the court to clarify the answers.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cites

17 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Powers v. Ohio
  Supreme Court· 1991-04-01· cited 2,917×
• State v. Henderson
  Arizona Supreme Court· 2005-07-08· cited 1,009×
• State of Arizona v. Christopher Mathew Payne
  Arizona Supreme Court· 2013-11-21· cited 304×
• State v. Cruz
  Arizona Supreme Court· 2008-04-21· cited 98×
• State v. Rose
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1978-12-22· cited 97×
• State v. McKinney
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1996-05-16· cited 94×
• State v. LeMaster
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1983-04-12· cited 64×
• State v. Martinez
  Arizona Supreme Court· 2000-05-11· cited 56×
• State v. Thornton
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1996-12-12· cited 38×
• State v. Reasoner
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1987-05-12· cited 24×
• State v. Smith
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1995-04-11· cited 14×
• State v. Colorado
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2023-08-17· cited 14×
• State v. Calderon
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1991-11-06· cited 13×
• Don Shooter v. Toby Farmer
  Arizona Supreme Court· 2014-07-29· cited 10×
• Voice of Surprise v. Skip Hall
  Arizona Supreme Court· 2023-08-14· cited 10×
• State v. Romero
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1992-11-19· cited 7×
• State of Arizona v. Larry James Fournier
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2023-07-26· cited 3×