Legal Opinion

State v. Smith

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided May 21, 1992No. 1 CA-CR 90-260PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

JACOBSON, Presiding Judge.

This appeal requires us to address whether we have subject matter jurisdiction to review a conviction for fundamental error when a defendant files a notice of appeal only from the sentence imposed and defense counsel files an opening brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). We conclude that we have jurisdiction to examine the entire record for fundamental error upon a timely appeal pursuant to A.R.S. § 13-4033. However, as a matter of judicial policy, we will limit the scope of that review to the sentencing…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Anders v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. Boykin v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  3. Vito Matarese v. Eugene Lefevre, Superintendent, Clinton Correctional Facility, and Robert Abrams, Attorney General, State of New YorkCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1986
  4. Walter J. Cobb, on Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated v. Jerry LewisCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1974
  5. State v. DawsonArizona Supreme Court · 1990

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. State v. O'DELLCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2002
  2. State of Arizona v. Steven Ray LopezCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2014
  3. State of Arizona v. Anthony Connue SerranoCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2014
  4. State v. DelgadilloCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1993
  5. State of Arizona v. Andres SanchezCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2023

1 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