State v. Warner

How courts have described this case

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

• “[W]here the state invades the attorney-client relationship and interferes with a defendant’s right to counsel the state has the burden to demonstrate that no evidence introduced at trial was tainted by the invasion.”
• “[I]f an accused is to derive the full benefits of his right to counsel, he must have the assurance of confidentiality and privacy of communication with his attorney.”
• “[I]f an accused is to derive the full benefits of his right to counsel, he must have the assurance of confidentiality and privacy of communication with his attorney.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

10 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Moody
  Arizona Supreme Court· 2004-08-09· cited 424×
• State v. Boggs
  Arizona Supreme Court· 2008-06-16· cited 91×
• State v. Rosengren
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2000-11-16· cited 76×
• State v. Pecard
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1999-10-12· cited 31×
• Christopher Matthew Clements v. Hon. bernini/state
  Arizona Supreme Court· 2020-09-09· cited 18×
• State v. Warner
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1988-11-08· cited 8×
• Carter v. State
  Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 2003-02-26· cited 2×
• State v. Greenwood
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2024-04-24· cited 2×
• State v. Boggs
  Arizona Supreme Court· 2008-04-09
• State of Arizona Ex Rel Adel v. Hon. Adleman
  Arizona Supreme Court· 2022-02-09