Arizona Supreme Court· 7/24/2009

State v. Speer

Citations

212 P.3d 787
221 Ariz. 449
561 Ariz. Adv. Rep. 48
2009 Ariz. LEXIS 242

How courts have described this case

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

explaining that on independent review the Court “must independently determine whether the State has established the aggravating circumstance beyond a reasonable doubt”
observing that defendant did not show how the evidence would have exonerated him or even mitigated his participation in the crime
observing that defendant did not demonstrate how missing evidence might have exonerated him or mitigated his participation in the crime
concluding the prosecutor’s “entirely unprofessional” statements uttered “outside the presence of the jury” did not deprive the defendant of a fair trial
concluding the prosecutor’s “entirely unprofessional” statements, uttered “outside the presence of the jury,” did not deprive the 24 STATE v. ARIAS Opinion of the Court egregious, the prosecutor: (1) argued that the defense experts were unethical liars, (2
concluding the prosecutor’s “entirely unprofessional” statements, uttered “outside the presence of the jury,” did not deprive the 24 STATE v. ARIAS Opinion of the Court egregious, the prosecutor: (1) argued that the defense experts were unethical liars, (2

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Hurwitz, Berch, Ryan, Bales, McGregor

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

18 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

72 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.