Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Harm, 340 P.3d 1110.

343 citing documents.

State v. Lockett Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Lockett Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
by obeying all laws, and not engaging or participating in any criminal activity.” ¶3 In March 2017, the State charged Lockett with two counts of sale or transportation of marijuana, alleging Lockett sold marijuana to an 1 “We view the facts in the light most favorable to sustaining the convictions with all reasonable inferences resolved against the defendant.” ¶ 2 n.2 (App. 2015) ().
State v. Monyer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Monyer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Calderon Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Calderon Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Tracey Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Tracey Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Antwine Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Antwine Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
¶ 2, n.2 (App. 2015) ().
State v. Navarro Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Navarro Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Castillo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Scalph Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Lamb Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Scalph Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
n.2, ¶ 3 (App. 2015) ().
State v. Castillo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Lamb Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
The court further advised: 1 “We view the facts in the light most favorable to sustaining the conviction[] with all reasonable inferences resolved against the defendant.” n.2, ¶ 2 (App. 2015) ().
State v. Perkins Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Perkins Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
1 “We view the facts in the light most favorable to sustaining the convictions with all reasonable inferences resolved against the defendant.” n.2, ¶ 2 (App. 2015) ().
State v. Phillips Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Phillips Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Medrano Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Medrano Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Jones 424 P.3d 447 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Walker Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Walker Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
The first detective wore a tactical vest identifying 1 “We view the facts in the light most favorable to sustaining the convictions with all reasonable inferences resolved against the defendant.” n.2, ¶ 2 (App. 2015) ().
State v. Jones 424 P.3d 447 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
The drafters of the AMMA chose different words to define “marijuana” than those used within the criminal code, and the court must “presume those distinctions are meaningful and evidence an intent to give a different meaning and consequence to the alternate language.” ¶ 19 (App. 2015) ( ¶ 37 (App. 2009)).
State v. Dahl Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Dahl Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
A notebook discovered on the property contained the names of Rick’s 1 “We view the facts in the light most favorable to sustaining the conviction[] with all reasonable inferences resolved against the defendant.” n.2, ¶ 2 (App. 2015) ().
State v. Santistevan Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Santistevan Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Another officer located Santistevan based on that description and several officers detained 1 “We review the facts in the light most favorable to sustaining the convictions with all reasonable inferences resolved against the defendant.” n.2, ¶¶ 2-3 (App. 2015) (citation omitted).
State v. Sibley Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Sibley Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
¶ 2, n.2 (App. 2015) ().
State v. Smith Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Smith Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Ramirez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Ramirez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
1 “We view the facts in the light most favorable to sustaining the convictions with all reasonable inferences resolved against the defendant.” n.2, ¶ 2 (App. 2015) ().
State v. Bush Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Bush Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
n.2, ¶ 2 (App. 2015) ().
State v. Dennis Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Dennis Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Dennis said he had just put the pants 1 n.2, ¶ 2 (App. 2015).
State v. Francois Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Francois Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
n.2, ¶ 2 (App. 2015) ().
Calderon-Torres Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Calderon-Torres Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
1 “We view the facts in the light most favorable to sustaining the convictions with all reasonable inferences resolved against the defendant.” n.2, ¶ 2 (App. 2015) ().
State v. Soto Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Soto Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Eduardo 1 “We view the facts in the light most favorable to sustaining the convictions with all reasonable inferences resolved against the defendant.” n.2, ¶ 2 (App. 2015) ().
State v. Young Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Young Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
When Young refused to take a field sobriety test, the officer placed 1 “We review the facts in the light most favorable to sustaining the convictions with all reasonable inferences resolved against the defendant.” n.2, ¶¶ 2-3 (App. 2015) (citation omitted).

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by