Legal Opinion

State v. Armstrong

Arizona Supreme Court

Decided July 29, 2008No. CR-06-0443-APPublishedCited by 27 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

BALES, Justice.

¶ 1 This automatic appeal is from a jury’s determination that Shad Daniel Armstrong should receive death sentences for two murders. We have jurisdiction pursuant to Article 6, Section 5(3) of the Arizona Constitution and Arizona Revised Statutes (“A.R.S.”) section 13-4031 (2001).

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

¶ 2 In 2000, a jury convicted Armstrong of murdering, and conspiring to murder, his sister Farrah Armstrong and her fiance Frank Williams. The trial judge imposed death sentences for each murder after finding two aggravators: Armstrong had murdered Farrah for pecuniary…

2Cases cited35 opinions

  1. Crawford v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  2. Delaware v. Van ArsdallSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. Ring v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
  4. Payne v. TennesseeSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  5. State v. HendersonArizona Supreme Court · 2005

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

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. State of Arizona v. Christopher Mathew PayneArizona Supreme Court · 2013
  2. State v. DannArizona Supreme Court · 2009
  3. State of Arizona v. Mark GoudeauArizona Supreme Court · 2016
  4. State v. MooreArizona Supreme Court · 2009
  5. State of Arizona v. Dale Shawn HausnerArizona Supreme Court · 2012

22 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