Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Fritz, 755 P.2d 444.

49 citing documents.

State v. Vicera-Popoca Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
State v. Vicera-Popoca Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
court “is in the best position to evaluate credibility and accuracy, as well as draw inferences, weigh, and balance”) (quotation and citation omitted); (“It is the duty of the [superior] court to resolve any conflicts in the evidence, and where the [superior] court’s ruling is based on substantial evidence, this court will affirm.”); (“The [superior] court is the sole arbitrator of the credibility of witnesses.”).
State v. McBee Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
State v. McBee Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
State of Arizona v. Rogelio Castro Solano 543 P.3d 278 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2024
State of Arizona v. Rogelio Castro Solano 543 P.3d 278 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2024
(trial court sole arbiter of credibility of witnesses in Rule 32 evidentiary hearing).
State v. Brackeen Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
State v. Brackeen Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
State of Arizona v. Kenneth Wayne Thompson II 502 P.3d 437 Ariz. 2022
State of Arizona v. Kenneth Wayne Thompson II 502 P.3d 437 Ariz. 2022
(“The trial court is the sole arbitrator of the credibility of witnesses.”).
State v. Wagner Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
State v. Wagner Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
(“A petition for post-conviction relief is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court.”); (determination of the credibility of witnesses at an evidentiary hearing in a post-conviction relief proceeding rests solely with the trial judge).
State v. King 480 P.3d 1250 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
State v. King 480 P.3d 1250 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
State v. Lawson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
State v. Lawson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
(citing Atwood, 171 Ariz. at 597)
State v. Montgomery Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State v. Montgomery Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Post-conviction relief “is applied quite restrictively to overturn guilty pleas,” primarily because by pleading guilty, a defendant waives all non-jurisdictional defenses, Botello-Rangel, 2020 WL 896477, at *2, ¶ 5.
State v. Workum Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State v. Workum Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
The superior court acted within its discretion in considering Workum’s credibility as a witness, and properly held Workum to his burden of proving the factual allegations underlying his claim by a preponderance of the evidence, see Ariz. R. Crim.
State v. Campbell Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Campbell Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Cervantez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Cervantez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Verdugo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Verdugo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Alvarado Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Alvarado Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Credibility determinations in post-conviction relief proceedings rest solely with the trial judge, and it is for the trial court to resolve conflicting testimony
State v. Parks Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Parks Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
2 STATE v. PARKS Decision of the Court ¶4 Credibility determinations in a Rule 32 proceeding rest solely with the trial judge, and it is for the trial court to resolve conflicting testimony.
State v. Valenzuela Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Valenzuela Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
¶4 As to Valenzuela’s claim that his counsel prevented him from testifying, credibility determinations rest solely with the trial court, see, and it is for the court to resolve conflicting testimony, (citations omitted).
State v. Rodriguez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Rodriguez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
(noting “[t]he trial court is the sole arbitrator of the credibility of witnesses” in post-conviction relief proceedings).
State v. Cruz Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Cruz Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
(“The trial court is the sole arbitrator of the credibility of witnesses.”).
State v. Smith Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Smith Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Wells Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Wells Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Grossman Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Grossman Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Washington v. Superior Court 881 P.2d 1196 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
Washington v. Superior Court 881 P.2d 1196 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
State v. Pac 854 P.2d 1175 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
State v. Engram 831 P.2d 362 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
State v. Engram 831 P.2d 362 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
In any event, the trial judge is the arbitrator of the credibility of witnesses, , and he apparently believed the defendant’s former counsel.
State v. Crocker 789 P.2d 186 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1990
State v. Crocker 789 P.2d 186 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1990