Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Nelson, 150 P.3d 769.

94 citing documents.

State v. Castleberry Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
State v. Castleberry Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
State v. Kisemh Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
State v. Segundo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
State v. Riehle Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
State v. Riehle Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND ¶4 We view and recount the facts in the light most favorable to sustaining the jury’s verdicts.1 On a Friday morning in October 2023, Riehle 1 ¶ 2 (App. 2007).
State v. Keeto Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
State v. Keeto Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
State v. Navarrete Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
State v. Navarrete Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
State v. Bussey Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
State v. Bussey Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
State v. Angulo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
State v. Angulo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
State v. Jarvis Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
State v. Jarvis Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
State v. Koch Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State v. Koch Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State v. Wright Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State v. Wright Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
1 “We view the facts in the light most favorable to sustaining the jury verdict and resolve all reasonable inferences against the [defendant].” ¶ 2 (App. 2007) ( ¶ 2 (App. 1999)).
State v. Francisco Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State v. Francisco Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State v. Trujillo 430 P.3d 379 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2018
State v. Trujillo 430 P.3d 379 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2018
See State v. Dean , , ¶ 19, , 1035 (App. 2010) (legal precedent from other jurisdictions informative); cf. State v. Nelson , , ¶ 11, , 771 (App. 2007) (reviewing decisions from other jurisdictions and finding Alaska's treatment of issue persuasive).
State v. Harris Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Harris Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Snethen Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Snethen Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
In reviewing Snethen’s noted challenges, we view the trial evidence in the light most favorable to sustaining the jury’s verdicts, ¶ 2 (App. 2007), and resolve all reasonable inferences against Snethen
State v. Quiroz Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Quiroz Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
He alternatively 1 “We view the facts in the light most favorable to sustaining the jury verdict and resolve all reasonable inferences against the appellant.” ¶ 2 (App. 2007).
State v. Sanford Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Sanford Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Escalante 396 P.3d 611 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Escalante 396 P.3d 611 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Mazzola Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Mazzola Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Gulley 382 P.3d 795 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Gulley 382 P.3d 795 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Lynam Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Lynam Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Garwo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Garwo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Gutierrez 381 P.3d 254 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Gutierrez 381 P.3d 254 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Clary Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Clary Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Dees Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Dees Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Saunders Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Saunders Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by