Cited by

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

82 citing documents.

State v. Lieder Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Lieder Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
An abuse of discretion is “an exercise which is manifestly unreasonable, exercised on untenable grounds or for untenable reasons.” ¶ 11
State v. Leary Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Leary Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Neese 366 P.3d 561 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Yashar Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Neese 366 P.3d 561 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Yashar Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
¶ 16 (App. 2007) (to prevail on claim of speedy trial violation, defendant must show prejudice resulting from the untimely trial).
State v. Sumpter Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Sumpter Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
“Abuse of discretion is ‘an exercise of discretion which is manifestly unreasonable, exercised on untenable grounds or for untenable reasons.’” ¶ 11, (citations omitted).
State v. Rodriguez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Rodriguez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State Ex Rel. Montgomery v. Padilla 349 P.3d 1100 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State Ex Rel. Montgomery v. Padilla 349 P.3d 1100 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Patton Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Patton Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
A complex case is “so complicated, by virtue of its nature or because of the evidence required, that the ordinary limits for the time to trial are insufficient and must be extended to afford more time to prepare so that the case can be fairly and fully presented.” ¶ 9, (quoting Snyder, 211 Ariz. at 120, ¶ 12, 118 P.3d at 635).
American Power Products, Inc. v. CSK Auto, Inc. 334 P.3d 199 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Earl v. Hon. garcia/state 324 P.3d 863 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Roosevelt Arthur Williams v. State of Arizona 303 P.3d 532 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2013
Roosevelt Arthur Williams v. State of Arizona 303 P.3d 532 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2013
Carey, 186 Ariz. at 124 , 920 P.2d at 4 (reviewing court does not reweigh expert testimony); , (reviewing court resolves conflicts in evidence in favor of sustaining judgment).
State of Arizona v. Anthony Duran 293 P.3d 537 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2013
State of Arizona v. Anthony Duran 293 P.3d 537 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2013
State v. McLemore 288 P.3d 775 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
State v. McLemore 288 P.3d 775 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
¶ 21 , (“[CJourt conducted the appropriate colloquy and informed Defendant of the rights and privileges he would relinquish and the disadvantages of self-representation.
Duckstein v. Wolf 282 P.3d 428 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
Duckstein v. Wolf 282 P.3d 428 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
¶ 48 , Lenze v. Synthes, Ltd., , (finding court abused its discretion in failing to set aside a default judgment entered as a sanction for a discovery violation without holding evidentiary hearing on fault).
State of Arizona v. Alyssa Marie Burr Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
State of Arizona v. Alyssa Marie Burr Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
An abuse of discretion occurs when the court commits an error of law, or when its exercise of discretion “‘is manifestly unreasonable, exercised on untenable grounds or for untenable reasons,’”
State of Arizona v. Jerry Alan Nuckols Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
State of Arizona v. Jerry Alan Nuckols Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
State v. Dixon 250 P.3d 1174 Ariz. 2011
State v. Dixon 250 P.3d 1174 Ariz. 2011
¶ 44, (“While Defendant contends that several jurors did see the restraints at some unspecified time, he provided no admissible evidence to support his contention.”).