State v. Escobedo
Court of Appeals of Arizona
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BARKER, Judge.
¶ 1 The question presented in this ease is whether the failure to impanel a required twelve-person jury is structural error or trial error. If such an error is structural, automatic reversal is required. State v. Hickman, 205 Ariz. 192, 199 n. 7, ¶ 29, 68 P.3d 418, 425 n. 7 (2003). (“[Structural errors require automatic reversal.”). If it is trial error, it is subject to fundamental error analysis, as Defendant did not object to the failure to impanel twelve jurors. State v. Henderson, 210 Ariz. 561, 567, ¶ 19, 115 P.3d 601, 607 (2005). Fundamental error analysis places…
2Cases cited44 opinions
- Anders v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Arizona v. FulminanteSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Neder v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
- Waller v. GeorgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Williams v. FloridaSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
39 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- State v. EscobedoCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2009