gave instruction in Arizona

18 Arizona opinions name it 2 courts 1945–2019 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Arizona courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (15)

Case	Followed	Cited
State v. Diazgreen ariz · 1991 · cited in 2 Arizona opinions naming this issue, 1995–2001 2 sentences 2001“We have long held that a party cannot complain on appeal that the trial court gave an instruction that he specifically requested.” State v. Diaz, 168 Ariz. 363, 365 , 813 P.2d 728, 730 (1991). 2001“We have long held that a party cannot complain on appeal that the trial court gave an instruction that he specifically requested.” State v. Diaz, 168 Ariz. 363, 365 , 813 P.2d 728, 730 (1991).	2	2
State v. Logangreen ariz · 2001 · cited in 1 Arizona opinions naming this issue, 2019–2019 1 sentence 2019See State v. Parker, 231 Ariz. 391, 405, ¶ 61 (2013) (finding that a defendant's stipulation to admit evidence "preclude[d] him from asserting on appeal that [the] admission was error"); see also State v. Logan, 200 Ariz. 564, 565-66, ¶¶ 8-9, 15 (2001) (refusing to consider claims of error in a jury instruction when the trial court gave the instruction as requested by the defendant).	1	1
State of Arizona v. Steven John Parkergreen ariz · 2013 · cited in 1 Arizona opinions naming this issue, 2019–2019 1 sentence 2019See State v. Parker, 231 Ariz. 391, 405, ¶ 61 (2013) (finding that a defendant's stipulation to admit evidence "preclude[d] him from asserting on appeal that [the] admission was error"); see also State v. Logan, 200 Ariz. 564, 565-66, ¶¶ 8-9, 15 (2001) (refusing to consider claims of error in a jury instruction when the trial court gave the instruction as requested by the defendant).	1	1
State v. Sarullogreen arizctapp · 2008 · cited in 1 Arizona opinions naming this issue, 2017–2017 1 sentence 2017State v. Sarullo, 219 Ariz. 431, 437, ¶ 24 (App. 2008) (prosecutor did not shift the burden of proof by arguing defendant had failed to call expert witnesses 4 The court gave the standard jury instruction defining possession.	1	1
State v. Hoffmangreen ariz · 1955 · cited in 1 Arizona opinions naming this issue, 2016–2016 2 sentences 2016See State v. Rutledge, 205 Ariz. 7, ¶ 30 , 66 P.3d 50, 56 (2003) (‘“The purpose of an objection is to permit the trial court to rectify possible error, and to enable the opposition to obviate the objection if possible.’ ”), quoting State v. Hoffman, 78 Ariz. 319, 325, 279 P.2d 898, 901 (1955). 2016See State v. Rutledge, 205 Ariz. 7, ¶ 30 , 66 P.3d 50, 56 (2003) (‘“The purpose of an objection is to permit the trial court to rectify possible error, and to enable the opposition to obviate the objection if possible.’ ”), quoting State v. Hoffman, 78 Ariz. 319, 325, 279 P.2d 898, 901 (1955).	1	1
State v. Rutledgegreen ariz · 2003 · cited in 1 Arizona opinions naming this issue, 2016–2016 2 sentences 2016See State v. Rutledge, 205 Ariz. 7, ¶ 30 , 66 P.3d 50, 56 (2003) (‘“The purpose of an objection is to permit the trial court to rectify possible error, and to enable the opposition to obviate the objection if possible.’ ”), quoting State v. Hoffman, 78 Ariz. 319, 325, 279 P.2d 898, 901 (1955). 2016See State v. Rutledge, 205 Ariz. 7, ¶ 30 , 66 P.3d 50, 56 (2003) (‘“The purpose of an objection is to permit the trial court to rectify possible error, and to enable the opposition to obviate the objection if possible.’ ”), quoting State v. Hoffman, 78 Ariz. 319, 325, 279 P.2d 898, 901 (1955).	1	1
State v. Huerstelgreen ariz · 2003 · cited in 1 Arizona opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008 2 sentences 2008In Huerstel , we found error in a capital murder trial when the trial court gave the instruction suggested in the comment to Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 22.4 to a jury that had been deliberating only three days and had given no indication that it was deadlocked. 206 Ariz. at 97-98, 101, ¶¶ 6-9, 25 , 75 P.3d at 702-03, 706 . 2008In Huerstel , we found error in a capital murder trial when the trial court gave the instruction suggested in the comment to Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 22.4 to a jury that had been deliberating only three days and had given no indication that it was deadlocked. 206 Ariz. at 97-98, 101, ¶¶ 6-9, 25 , 75 P.3d at 702-03, 706 .	1	1
State v. Thompsongreen ariz · 2003 · cited in 1 Arizona opinions naming this issue, 2005–2005 2 sentences 2005Gomez did not object on either occasion. ¶ 19 In State v. Thompson, we found the use of the phrase “proof of actual reflection is not required” to be error if given in a jury instruction “without further clarification.” 204 Ariz. 471 , 480 ¶ 34, 65 P.3d 420, 429 (2003). 2005Gomez did not object on either occasion. ¶ 19 In State v. Thompson, we found the use of the phrase “proof of actual reflection is not required” to be error if given in a jury instruction “without further clarification.” 204 Ariz. 471 , 480 ¶ 34, 65 P.3d 420, 429 (2003).	1	1
State v. Celayagreen ariz · 1983 · cited in 1 Arizona opinions naming this issue, 1991–1991 2 sentences 1991DISCUSSION A lesser-included offense is one “composed solely of some but not all of the elements of the greater crime so that it is impossible to have committed the crime charged without having committed the lesser one.” State v. Celaya, 135 Ariz. 248, 251 , 660 P.2d 849, 852 (1983). 1991DISCUSSION A lesser-included offense is one “composed solely of some but not all of the elements of the greater crime so that it is impossible to have committed the crime charged without having committed the lesser one.” State v. Celaya, 135 Ariz. 248, 251 , 660 P.2d 849, 852 (1983).	1	1
State v. Taylorgreen ariz · 1973 · cited in 1 Arizona opinions naming this issue, 1991–1991 2 sentences 1991State v. Taylor, 109 Ariz. 481, 483 , 512 P.2d 590, 592 (1973); State v. Dutton, 106 Ariz. 463, 466 , 478 P.2d 87, 90 (1970) (a defendant cannot complain on appeal that an instruction placed burden of proving innocence upon defendant, when defendant did not object to instruction at trial and in fact requested it); Roscoe v. Schoolitz, 105 Ariz. 310, 315 , 464 P.2d 333, 338 (1970); State v. Evans, 88 Ariz. 364, 369 , 356 P.2d 1106, 1109 (1960) (citing State v. Serna, 69 Ariz. 181, 186 , 211 P.2d 455, 458 (1949), cert. denied, 339 U.S. 973 , 70 S.Ct. 1031 , 94 L.Ed. 1380 (1950)); Sisson v. State 1991State v. Taylor, 109 Ariz. 481, 483 , 512 P.2d 590, 592 (1973); State v. Dutton, 106 Ariz. 463, 466 , 478 P.2d 87, 90 (1970) (a defendant cannot complain on appeal that an instruction placed burden of proving innocence upon defendant, when defendant did not object to instruction at trial and in fact requested it); Roscoe v. Schoolitz, 105 Ariz. 310, 315 , 464 P.2d 333, 338 (1970); State v. Evans, 88 Ariz. 364, 369 , 356 P.2d 1106, 1109 (1960) (citing State v. Serna, 69 Ariz. 181, 186 , 211 P.2d 455, 458 (1949), cert. denied, 339 U.S. 973 , 70 S.Ct. 1031 , 94 L.Ed. 1380 (1950)); Sisson v. State	1	1
Roscoe v. Schoolitzgreen ariz · 1970 · cited in 1 Arizona opinions naming this issue, 1991–1991 2 sentences 1991State v. Taylor, 109 Ariz. 481, 483 , 512 P.2d 590, 592 (1973); State v. Dutton, 106 Ariz. 463, 466 , 478 P.2d 87, 90 (1970) (a defendant cannot complain on appeal that an instruction placed burden of proving innocence upon defendant, when defendant did not object to instruction at trial and in fact requested it); Roscoe v. Schoolitz, 105 Ariz. 310, 315 , 464 P.2d 333, 338 (1970); State v. Evans, 88 Ariz. 364, 369 , 356 P.2d 1106, 1109 (1960) (citing State v. Serna, 69 Ariz. 181, 186 , 211 P.2d 455, 458 (1949), cert. denied, 339 U.S. 973 , 70 S.Ct. 1031 , 94 L.Ed. 1380 (1950)); Sisson v. State 1991State v. Taylor, 109 Ariz. 481, 483 , 512 P.2d 590, 592 (1973); State v. Dutton, 106 Ariz. 463, 466 , 478 P.2d 87, 90 (1970) (a defendant cannot complain on appeal that an instruction placed burden of proving innocence upon defendant, when defendant did not object to instruction at trial and in fact requested it); Roscoe v. Schoolitz, 105 Ariz. 310, 315 , 464 P.2d 333, 338 (1970); State v. Evans, 88 Ariz. 364, 369 , 356 P.2d 1106, 1109 (1960) (citing State v. Serna, 69 Ariz. 181, 186 , 211 P.2d 455, 458 (1949), cert. denied, 339 U.S. 973 , 70 S.Ct. 1031 , 94 L.Ed. 1380 (1950)); Sisson v. State	1	1
Verdugo v. Po Shing Geegreen arizctapp · 1966 · cited in 1 Arizona opinions naming this issue, 1991–1991 2 sentences 1991State v. Taylor, 109 Ariz. 481, 483 , 512 P.2d 590, 592 (1973); State v. Dutton, 106 Ariz. 463, 466 , 478 P.2d 87, 90 (1970) (a defendant cannot complain on appeal that an instruction placed burden of proving innocence upon defendant, when defendant did not object to instruction at trial and in fact requested it); Roscoe v. Schoolitz, 105 Ariz. 310, 315 , 464 P.2d 333, 338 (1970); State v. Evans, 88 Ariz. 364, 369 , 356 P.2d 1106, 1109 (1960) (citing State v. Serna, 69 Ariz. 181, 186 , 211 P.2d 455, 458 (1949), cert. denied, 339 U.S. 973 , 70 S.Ct. 1031 , 94 L.Ed. 1380 (1950)); Sisson v. State 1991State v. Taylor, 109 Ariz. 481, 483 , 512 P.2d 590, 592 (1973); State v. Dutton, 106 Ariz. 463, 466 , 478 P.2d 87, 90 (1970) (a defendant cannot complain on appeal that an instruction placed burden of proving innocence upon defendant, when defendant did not object to instruction at trial and in fact requested it); Roscoe v. Schoolitz, 105 Ariz. 310, 315 , 464 P.2d 333, 338 (1970); State v. Evans, 88 Ariz. 364, 369 , 356 P.2d 1106, 1109 (1960) (citing State v. Serna, 69 Ariz. 181, 186 , 211 P.2d 455, 458 (1949), cert. denied, 339 U.S. 973 , 70 S.Ct. 1031 , 94 L.Ed. 1380 (1950)); Sisson v. State	1	1
State v. Duttongreen ariz · 1970 · cited in 1 Arizona opinions naming this issue, 1991–1991 2 sentences 1991State v. Taylor, 109 Ariz. 481, 483 , 512 P.2d 590, 592 (1973); State v. Dutton, 106 Ariz. 463, 466 , 478 P.2d 87, 90 (1970) (a defendant cannot complain on appeal that an instruction placed burden of proving innocence upon defendant, when defendant did not object to instruction at trial and in fact requested it); Roscoe v. Schoolitz, 105 Ariz. 310, 315 , 464 P.2d 333, 338 (1970); State v. Evans, 88 Ariz. 364, 369 , 356 P.2d 1106, 1109 (1960) (citing State v. Serna, 69 Ariz. 181, 186 , 211 P.2d 455, 458 (1949), cert. denied, 339 U.S. 973 , 70 S.Ct. 1031 , 94 L.Ed. 1380 (1950)); Sisson v. State 1991State v. Taylor, 109 Ariz. 481, 483 , 512 P.2d 590, 592 (1973); State v. Dutton, 106 Ariz. 463, 466 , 478 P.2d 87, 90 (1970) (a defendant cannot complain on appeal that an instruction placed burden of proving innocence upon defendant, when defendant did not object to instruction at trial and in fact requested it); Roscoe v. Schoolitz, 105 Ariz. 310, 315 , 464 P.2d 333, 338 (1970); State v. Evans, 88 Ariz. 364, 369 , 356 P.2d 1106, 1109 (1960) (citing State v. Serna, 69 Ariz. 181, 186 , 211 P.2d 455, 458 (1949), cert. denied, 339 U.S. 973 , 70 S.Ct. 1031 , 94 L.Ed. 1380 (1950)); Sisson v. State	1	1
State v. Sernagreen ariz · 1949 · cited in 1 Arizona opinions naming this issue, 1991–1991 2 sentences 1991State v. Taylor, 109 Ariz. 481, 483 , 512 P.2d 590, 592 (1973); State v. Dutton, 106 Ariz. 463, 466 , 478 P.2d 87, 90 (1970) (a defendant cannot complain on appeal that an instruction placed burden of proving innocence upon defendant, when defendant did not object to instruction at trial and in fact requested it); Roscoe v. Schoolitz, 105 Ariz. 310, 315 , 464 P.2d 333, 338 (1970); State v. Evans, 88 Ariz. 364, 369 , 356 P.2d 1106, 1109 (1960) (citing State v. Serna, 69 Ariz. 181, 186 , 211 P.2d 455, 458 (1949), cert. denied, 339 U.S. 973 , 70 S.Ct. 1031 , 94 L.Ed. 1380 (1950)); Sisson v. State 1991State v. Taylor, 109 Ariz. 481, 483 , 512 P.2d 590, 592 (1973); State v. Dutton, 106 Ariz. 463, 466 , 478 P.2d 87, 90 (1970) (a defendant cannot complain on appeal that an instruction placed burden of proving innocence upon defendant, when defendant did not object to instruction at trial and in fact requested it); Roscoe v. Schoolitz, 105 Ariz. 310, 315 , 464 P.2d 333, 338 (1970); State v. Evans, 88 Ariz. 364, 369 , 356 P.2d 1106, 1109 (1960) (citing State v. Serna, 69 Ariz. 181, 186 , 211 P.2d 455, 458 (1949), cert. denied, 339 U.S. 973 , 70 S.Ct. 1031 , 94 L.Ed. 1380 (1950)); Sisson v. State	1	1
State v. Dessureaultgreen ariz · 1969 · cited in 1 Arizona opinions naming this issue, 1980–1980 2 sentences 1980State v. Dessureault, 104 Ariz. 380, at 384 , 453 P.2d 951 at 955 (1969).” The trial court gave this instruction instead: “In considering the correctness of the in-court identification of the defendant, you should consider whether such identifica 298 tion is tainted by any identification made of the defendant by witnesses before testifying. 1980State v. Dessureault, 104 Ariz. 380, at 384 , 453 P.2d 951 at 955 (1969).” The trial court gave this instruction instead: “In considering the correctness of the in-court identification of the defendant, you should consider whether such identifica 298 tion is tainted by any identification made of the defendant by witnesses before testifying.	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (1)

Case	Negative	Cited
State v. Brooksgreen ariz · 1968 · cited in 1 Arizona opinions naming this issue, 2009–2009 2 sentences 2009But see State v. Brooks, 103 Ariz. 472 , 445 P.2d 831 (1968) (finding error to be prejudicial and thus reversible under Article 6, Section 27, of the Arizona Constitution, when the trial court gave an instruction on "lying in wait" and there was no factual evidence supporting the instruction). ¶ 19 Long ago, the Arizona Supreme Court emphasized that whatever may be the rule in other jurisdictions, in Arizona we are required to give effect to the constitutional provision forbidding automatic reversal (presumption of prejudice) for technical error: This section was undoubtedly inserted for the e 2009But see State v. Brooks, 103 Ariz. 472 , 445 P.2d 831 (1968) (finding error to be prejudicial and thus reversible under Article 6, Section 27, of the Arizona Constitution, when the trial court gave an instruction on "lying in wait" and there was no factual evidence supporting the instruction). ¶ 19 Long ago, the Arizona Supreme Court emphasized that whatever may be the rule in other jurisdictions, in Arizona we are required to give effect to the constitutional provision forbidding automatic reversal (presumption of prejudice) for technical error: This section was undoubtedly inserted for the e	1	1

Also cited on this issue (15)

Case	Cited	Years
State v. Piper green ariz · 1976 2 sentences 2014You must not let this choice affect your deliberations in any way. 7 STATE v. SHIELDS Decision of the Court later granted new trials, id., but argued that the trial court erred when the court gave the instruction about his right not to testify over counsel’s objection. 2014Id. at 393 , 555 P.2d at 639.	1	2014–2014
State v. Portillo green ariz · 1995 2 sentences 2002The court gave the instruction mandated in State v. Portillo, 182 Ariz. 592 , 898 P.2d 970 (1995). 2002The court gave the instruction mandated in State v. Portillo, 182 Ariz. 592 , 898 P.2d 970 (1995).	1	2002–2002
United States v. Albert Miranda green ca9 · 1993 1 sentence 1996In United States v. Miranda, 986 F.2d 1283 (9th Cir.1993), cert. denied, 508 U.S. 929 , 113 S.Ct. 2393 , 124 L.Ed.2d 295 (1993), the trial court gave this instruction when the jury indicated it was evenly split on two counts: This case has taken a great deal of time and effort to prepare and try.	1	1996–1996
Domby v. Central Intelligence Agency green scotus · 1993 1 sentence 1996In United States v. Miranda, 986 F.2d 1283 (9th Cir.1993), cert. denied, 508 U.S. 929 , 113 S.Ct. 2393 , 124 L.Ed.2d 295 (1993), the trial court gave this instruction when the jury indicated it was evenly split on two counts: This case has taken a great deal of time and effort to prepare and try.	1	1996–1996
Islas-Molinero v. United States green scotus · 1993 1 sentence 1996In United States v. Miranda, 986 F.2d 1283 (9th Cir.1993), cert. denied, 508 U.S. 929 , 113 S.Ct. 2393 , 124 L.Ed.2d 295 (1993), the trial court gave this instruction when the jury indicated it was evenly split on two counts: This case has taken a great deal of time and effort to prepare and try.	1	1996–1996
Sisson v. State green ariz · 1914 2 sentences 1991State v. Taylor, 109 Ariz. 481, 483 , 512 P.2d 590, 592 (1973); State v. Dutton, 106 Ariz. 463, 466 , 478 P.2d 87, 90 (1970) (a defendant cannot complain on appeal that an instruction placed burden of proving innocence upon defendant, when defendant did not object to instruction at trial and in fact requested it); Roscoe v. Schoolitz, 105 Ariz. 310, 315 , 464 P.2d 333, 338 (1970); State v. Evans, 88 Ariz. 364, 369 , 356 P.2d 1106, 1109 (1960) (citing State v. Serna, 69 Ariz. 181, 186 , 211 P.2d 455, 458 (1949), cert. denied, 339 U.S. 973 , 70 S.Ct. 1031 , 94 L.Ed. 1380 (1950)); Sisson v. State 1991State v. Taylor, 109 Ariz. 481, 483 , 512 P.2d 590, 592 (1973); State v. Dutton, 106 Ariz. 463, 466 , 478 P.2d 87, 90 (1970) (a defendant cannot complain on appeal that an instruction placed burden of proving innocence upon defendant, when defendant did not object to instruction at trial and in fact requested it); Roscoe v. Schoolitz, 105 Ariz. 310, 315 , 464 P.2d 333, 338 (1970); State v. Evans, 88 Ariz. 364, 369 , 356 P.2d 1106, 1109 (1960) (citing State v. Serna, 69 Ariz. 181, 186 , 211 P.2d 455, 458 (1949), cert. denied, 339 U.S. 973 , 70 S.Ct. 1031 , 94 L.Ed. 1380 (1950)); Sisson v. State	1	1991–1991
Serna v. Walters neutral scotus · 1950 1 sentence 1991State v. Taylor, 109 Ariz. 481, 483 , 512 P.2d 590, 592 (1973); State v. Dutton, 106 Ariz. 463, 466 , 478 P.2d 87, 90 (1970) (a defendant cannot complain on appeal that an instruction placed burden of proving innocence upon defendant, when defendant did not object to instruction at trial and in fact requested it); Roscoe v. Schoolitz, 105 Ariz. 310, 315 , 464 P.2d 333, 338 (1970); State v. Evans, 88 Ariz. 364, 369 , 356 P.2d 1106, 1109 (1960) (citing State v. Serna, 69 Ariz. 181, 186 , 211 P.2d 455, 458 (1949), cert. denied, 339 U.S. 973 , 70 S.Ct. 1031 , 94 L.Ed. 1380 (1950)); Sisson v. State	1	1991–1991
Prichard v. United States green scotus · 1950 1 sentence 1991State v. Taylor, 109 Ariz. 481, 483 , 512 P.2d 590, 592 (1973); State v. Dutton, 106 Ariz. 463, 466 , 478 P.2d 87, 90 (1970) (a defendant cannot complain on appeal that an instruction placed burden of proving innocence upon defendant, when defendant did not object to instruction at trial and in fact requested it); Roscoe v. Schoolitz, 105 Ariz. 310, 315 , 464 P.2d 333, 338 (1970); State v. Evans, 88 Ariz. 364, 369 , 356 P.2d 1106, 1109 (1960) (citing State v. Serna, 69 Ariz. 181, 186 , 211 P.2d 455, 458 (1949), cert. denied, 339 U.S. 973 , 70 S.Ct. 1031 , 94 L.Ed. 1380 (1950)); Sisson v. State	1	1991–1991
Jackson v. United States neutral scotus · 1950 1 sentence 1991State v. Taylor, 109 Ariz. 481, 483 , 512 P.2d 590, 592 (1973); State v. Dutton, 106 Ariz. 463, 466 , 478 P.2d 87, 90 (1970) (a defendant cannot complain on appeal that an instruction placed burden of proving innocence upon defendant, when defendant did not object to instruction at trial and in fact requested it); Roscoe v. Schoolitz, 105 Ariz. 310, 315 , 464 P.2d 333, 338 (1970); State v. Evans, 88 Ariz. 364, 369 , 356 P.2d 1106, 1109 (1960) (citing State v. Serna, 69 Ariz. 181, 186 , 211 P.2d 455, 458 (1949), cert. denied, 339 U.S. 973 , 70 S.Ct. 1031 , 94 L.Ed. 1380 (1950)); Sisson v. State	1	1991–1991
State v. Evans green ariz · 1960 2 sentences 1991State v. Taylor, 109 Ariz. 481, 483 , 512 P.2d 590, 592 (1973); State v. Dutton, 106 Ariz. 463, 466 , 478 P.2d 87, 90 (1970) (a defendant cannot complain on appeal that an instruction placed burden of proving innocence upon defendant, when defendant did not object to instruction at trial and in fact requested it); Roscoe v. Schoolitz, 105 Ariz. 310, 315 , 464 P.2d 333, 338 (1970); State v. Evans, 88 Ariz. 364, 369 , 356 P.2d 1106, 1109 (1960) (citing State v. Serna, 69 Ariz. 181, 186 , 211 P.2d 455, 458 (1949), cert. denied, 339 U.S. 973 , 70 S.Ct. 1031 , 94 L.Ed. 1380 (1950)); Sisson v. State 1991State v. Taylor, 109 Ariz. 481, 483 , 512 P.2d 590, 592 (1973); State v. Dutton, 106 Ariz. 463, 466 , 478 P.2d 87, 90 (1970) (a defendant cannot complain on appeal that an instruction placed burden of proving innocence upon defendant, when defendant did not object to instruction at trial and in fact requested it); Roscoe v. Schoolitz, 105 Ariz. 310, 315 , 464 P.2d 333, 338 (1970); State v. Evans, 88 Ariz. 364, 369 , 356 P.2d 1106, 1109 (1960) (citing State v. Serna, 69 Ariz. 181, 186 , 211 P.2d 455, 458 (1949), cert. denied, 339 U.S. 973 , 70 S.Ct. 1031 , 94 L.Ed. 1380 (1950)); Sisson v. State	1	1991–1991
State v. Smith green ariz · 1972 2 sentences 1988Id., 108 Ariz. at 124 , 493 P.2d at 907 . 1988Id., 108 Ariz. at 124 , 493 P.2d at 907 .	1	1988–1988
People v. Wester green calctapp · 1965 1 sentence 1973“If, however, the threats or menaces are removed and he is no longer under such influences to the end that he no longer believes that his life is then imminently and immediately endangered, a further, continued, willful and intentional departure from the limits of custody by him will constitute the crime of escape.” Instead of this instruction the court gave an instruction on intent as follows: “In the crime of escape there must exist in the mind of the perpetrator the specific intent to voluntarily leave lawful custody with the intent to evade the due course of justice, and unless such intent	1	1973–1973
Odekirk v. Austin green ariz · 1961 2 sentences 1962Plaintiff-appellee admits that this instruction was an incorrect statement of the law in view of this court’s decision in Odekirk v. Austin, 90 Ariz. 97 , 366 P.2d 80 (1961), which was handed down after the instant case was tried. 1962Plaintiff-appellee admits that this instruction was an incorrect statement of the law in view of this court’s decision in Odekirk v. Austin, 90 Ariz. 97 , 366 P.2d 80 (1961), which was handed down after the instant case was tried.	1	1962–1962
Garrett v. State green · 1923	1	1945–1945
People v. Ryan green cal · 1907 2 sentences 1945To give such an instruction is to expressly disparage the defendant — “the very thing that a court has no authority to do, in view of our constitutional provision. ’ ’ People v. Ryan, 152 Cal. 364 , 92 Pac. 853 .’ ” In Garrett v. State, 25 Ariz. 508 , 219 Pac. 593, 594 , the appellant’s sole defense was an alibi in a case of robbery, and the trial court gave this instruction: “ ‘Gentlemen, on the question of the alibi defense offered by this defendant, the testimony is in irreconcilable conflict. 1945To give such an instruction is to expressly disparage the defendant — “the very thing that a court has no authority to do, in view of our constitutional provision. ’ ’ People v. Ryan, 152 Cal. 364 , 92 Pac. 853 .’ ” In Garrett v. State, 25 Ariz. 508 , 219 Pac. 593, 594 , the appellant’s sole defense was an alibi in a case of robbery, and the trial court gave this instruction: “ ‘Gentlemen, on the question of the alibi defense offered by this defendant, the testimony is in irreconcilable conflict.	1	1945–1945

Statutes the citing opinions construe

AZ § Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-703 (4) AZ § Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-1101 (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

CA 265 (1899–2026) MO 88 (1877–2025) IL 70 (1883–2024) WA 66 (1906–2026) FL 45 (1970–2025) TX 42 (1919–2026) IN 41 (1835–2018) NY 33 (1930–2024) OK 32 (1897–2009) AR 30 (1861–2010) OH 29 (1982–2026) MI 25 (1926–2025) KY 24 (1912–2016) GA 23 (1974–2025) OR 22 (1963–2026) KS 21 (1900–2020) CT 20 (1913–2022) CO 19 (1947–2026) IA 19 (1882–2017) NC 19 (1929–2026) NE 19 (1907–2023) AZ 18 (1945–2019) PA 18 (1932–2026) VA 15 (1929–2026) DC 13 (1974–2014) LA 11 (1984–2020) MN 11 (1974–2026) AL 11 (1918–2013) WY 10 (1907–2025) ID 9 (1932–2013) NM 9 (1952–2018) TN 9 (1934–2026) NJ 8 (1976–2025) MS 8 (1967–2026) MT 7 (1905–1988) WV 7 (1891–2016) UT 6 (1911–2022) NH 6 (1970–2017) HI 5 (1962–2015) SD 5 (1900–1999) MD 5 (1970–2021) NV 4 (1914–2014) ME 4 (1991–2005) ND 4 (1974–2003) WI 4 (1958–1995) AK 3 (1971–1985)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check