Legal Opinion
Stewart v. Smith
Arizona Supreme Court
Decided May 30, 2002No. CV-01-0433-CQPublishedCited by 60 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
KAUFMAN, Judge. *
¶ 1 The Supreme Court of the United States has certified the following question to this court:
At the time of respondent’s third Rule 32 petition in 1995, did the question whether an asserted claim was of “sufficient constitutional magnitude” to require a knowing, voluntary and intelligent waiver for purposes of Rule 32.2(a)(3), see Ariz. Rule Crim. Proc. 32.2(a)(3), comment (West 2000), depend upon the merits of the particular claim, see State v. French, 198 Ariz. 119, 121-122, 7 P.3d 128, 130-131 (2000); State v. Curtis, 185 Ariz. 112, 115, 912 P.2d 1341, 1344 (1995), or…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Schneckloth v. BustamonteSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- United States v. Donald TeagueCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1992
- James Brown v. Christopher ArtuzCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1997
- State v. SpreitzArizona Supreme Court · 2002
- United States v. Jacob PlitmanCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1999
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by60 opinions
- Gary Paul Cassett v. Terry L. Stewart, DirectorCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
- Donald Edward Beaty v. Terry Stewart, DirectorCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
- Stewart v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
- State v. SwoopesCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2007
- Stokley v. RyanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
55 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.