Legal Opinion

State v. Allen

Arizona Supreme Court

Decided December 8, 2009No. CR-08-0368-PRPublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

BERCH, Chief Justice.

¶ 1 This case addresses whether a court must engage a defendant who stipulates to the elements of a criminal offense in a colloquy like that afforded a defendant who pleads guilty. We conclude that, unless the defendant pleads guilty to an offense, no specific colloquy is required by Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238, 89 S.Ct. 1709, 23 L.Ed.2d 274 (1969), or Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 17.

I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

¶ 2 Two undercover Phoenix police officers heard screams as they drove through their assigned neighborhood on December 8, 2006. They saw…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Boykin v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  2. Kercheval v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
  3. Florida v. NixonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  4. State v. SpreitzArizona Supreme Court · 2002
  5. State v. WestArizona Supreme Court · 1993

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. State of Arizona v. Edward James RoseArizona Supreme Court · 2013
  2. State of Arizona v. Aaron Brian GunchesArizona Supreme Court · 2016
  3. State of Arizona v. Craig A. WilliamsonCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2015
  4. State v. Hon. hancock/jennifer FerrellArizona Supreme Court · 2015
  5. Smith v. BeesleyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2011

4 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