Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Wassenaar, 161 P.3d 608.

82 citing documents.

State v. Whiteside Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
State v. Whiteside Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
–69 (1984); ¶ 16 (App. 2007) (“A defendant who fails to establish that his 12 STATE v. WHITESIDE Decision of the Court defense was prejudiced or that he was deprived of a fair trial has not established prejudice sufficient to
State v. Fattouch Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
State v. Fattouch Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
“Abuse of discretion is ‘an exercise of discretion [that] is manifestly unreasonable, exercised on untenable grounds or for untenable reasons.’“ ¶ 11 (App. 2007).
Fernando Navarro-Figueroa v. State of Arizona Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2025
Fernando Navarro-Figueroa v. State of Arizona Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2025
(“The trial court has ‘broad discretion’ regarding its management of the manner in which trial will be conducted, and has a duty to exercise that discretion.” ()).
Tillman v. Smith Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
Tillman v. Smith Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
decision) ( ¶ 48 (App. 2007)).
State of Arizona v. Steven Ricardo Vallejo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2025
State of Arizona v. Steven Ricardo Vallejo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2025
State v. Dobbins Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
State v. Dobbins Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Determining “[w]hether [the superior] court abused its discretion and prejudice resulted depends upon the facts of each case.” ¶ 16 (App. 2007).
State v. Stock Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
State v. Stock Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
We “may affirm on any basis supported by the record.” ¶ 50 (App. 2007).
State v. Dudley Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
State v. Dudley Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
¶ 18 (App. 2007) (including prejudice as the most important of four factors for a constitutional speedy trial violation).
Murray v. Murray Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
Murray v. Murray Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
State v. Leota 538 P.3d 1040 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
State v. Leota 538 P.3d 1040 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
¶ 20 (App. 2007) (The defendant’s claim he was under “undue anxiety and stress” could not, without more, show prejudice under Rule 8 or the United States Constitution when he “never argued that the delay caused him to be subject to prolonged confinement, that he was unable to fully investigate his case, that he
State v. Gilbert Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Gilbert Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
¶ 50 (App. 2007) (The court may affirm “on any basis supported by the record.”); ¶ 28 (App. 2014) (“[A]n appellant always carries the burden of demonstrating an error that entitles him to relief.”).
State v. Cardwell Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Cardwell Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
We review such evidentiary rulings 12 STATE v. CARDWELL Decision of the Court for abuse of discretion, Ellison, 213 Ariz. at 29, ¶ 42, and will “affirm on any basis supported by the record.” ¶ 50 (App. 2007).
State v. Land Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Land Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Horak Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Horak Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
¶ 50 (App. 2007) (“We may affirm on any basis supported by the record.”).
State v. Wilson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Wilson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
¶ 50 (App. 2007) (“We may affirm on any basis supported by the record.”).
State v. Jones Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Jones Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Grewal Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
State v. Grewal Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Murrell v. Tovar Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Murrell v. Tovar Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
¶9 “We may affirm on any basis supported by the record.” ¶ 50 (App. 2007) (citation omitted).
State v. Torres Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State v. Torres Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
However, this court will affirm a superior court’s ruling “on any basis supported by the record.” ¶ 50 (App. 2007).
State v. Dikes Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State v. Dikes Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
¶ 50 (App. 2007) (“We may affirm on any basis supported by the record.”).
State v. Berhane Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State v. Berhane Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
–77, ¶¶ 44, 48–51 (App. 2007) (court did not err by denying an evidentiary hearing when the defendant failed to support the claim with evidence); (court did not err by denying the motion to disclose informant based solely on counsel’s argument).
State v. Cota Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State v. Cota Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Cota fails to show that he “could not present his entire defense as intended.” ¶ 20 (App. 2007).
State v. Ping Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Ping Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
“Abuse of discretion is ‘an exercise of discretion which is manifestly unreasonable, exercised on untenable grounds or for untenable reasons.’” ¶ 11 (App. 2007) ().
State v. Aguilera Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Aguilera Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
P. 8.4(a); ¶ 8 (App. 2007).
State v. Sales Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Sales Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016