Court of Appeals of Arizona· 5/13/1975
State v. Rose
Citations
- 535 P.2d 617
- 24 Ariz. App. 25
- 1975 Ariz. App. LEXIS 633
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- defendant’s allegation of prejudice resulting from unavailable witness insufficient when no evidence presented “which would indicate that any specific unavailable witness’s testimony would have been beneficial”
- defendant’s allegation of prejudice resulting from unavailable witness insufficient when no evidence presented “which would indicate that any specific unavailable witness’s testimony would have been beneficial”
- defendant’s allegation of prejudice resulting from unavailable witness insufficient when no evidence presented “which would indicate that any specific unavailable witness’s testimony would have been beneficial”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Haire, Jacobson, Eubank
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
5 cases in this archive cite this case.
Cites
10 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Barker v. WingoSupreme Court· 1972-06-22· cited 12,108×
- State v. ShawArizona Supreme Court· 1970-06-18· cited 58×
- State v. BlazakArizona Supreme Court· 1969-12-08· cited 51×
- State v. BallingerArizona Supreme Court· 1974-03-14· cited 33×
- State v. ClemonsArizona Supreme Court· 1973-11-01· cited 26×
- State Ex Rel. Berger v. SUPERIOR COURT, IN AND FOR COUNTY OF MARICOPAArizona Supreme Court· 1970-11-10· cited 26×
- State v. WilliamsArizona Supreme Court· 1973-11-15· cited 14×
- State v. BranninArizona Supreme Court· 1973-09-24· cited 13×
- State v. LemonArizona Supreme Court· 1974-05-01· cited 10×
- State v. RogersArizona Supreme Court· 1974-05-17· cited 7×
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.