Legal Opinion

State v. Bishop

Arizona Supreme Court

Decided November 7, 1989No. CR-87-0236-APPublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

FELDMAN, Vice Chief Justice.

This case is before us for the third time. The issue is whether Curtis Nelson Bishop was competent to plead guilty to murder in 1982. In State v. Bishop, 139 Ariz. 567, 571, 679 P.2d 1054, 1058 (1984) (Bishop I), we remanded the case for a new hearing on defendant’s competency. In Bishop v. Superior Court, 150 Ariz. 404, 407-08, 411, 724 P.2d 23, 26-27, 30 (1986) (Bishop II), we held that because a competency hearing is non-adversarial, the state could call defendant’s former counsel as a witness. We now review the trial court’s post-hearing determination that…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Westbrook v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. Gilbert F. Sieling, Sr. v. Frank A. Eyman, Warden, Arizona State PrisonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1973
  3. Arnold v. Arizona Department of Health ServicesArizona Supreme Court · 1989
  4. State v. GirdlerArizona Supreme Court · 1983
  5. James John Makal v. State of Arizona and Harold G. Cardwell, Superintendent, Arizona State PrisonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1976

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. State v. MoodyArizona Supreme Court · 2004
  2. State v. BrewerArizona Supreme Court · 1992
  3. State v. GlasselArizona Supreme Court · 2005
  4. State v. DjerfArizona Supreme Court · 1998
  5. State v. KayerArizona Supreme Court · 1999

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API