Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Rutledge, 4 P.3d 444.

37 citing documents.

State v. Foster 559 P.3d 1139 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
State v. Foster 559 P.3d 1139 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
State of Arizona v. George Willie Rios 528 P.3d 479 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2023
State of Arizona v. George Willie Rios 528 P.3d 479 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2023
¶32 We review the trial court’s decision to give a jury instruction for abuse of discretion, and we will only reverse if “the instructions, when taken as a whole, would mislead the jurors.” ().
State v. Hernandez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Hernandez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
¶24 This court reviews jury instructions for an abuse of discretion and “will not reverse a conviction based on the trial court’s ruling on a jury instruction ‘unless we can reasonably find that the instructions, when taken as a whole, would mislead the jurors.’” ¶ 15 (App. 2000) (citations omitted).
State v. Gipson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State v. Gipson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
¶ 15 (App. 2000) (citation omitted).
State v. Frazer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Frazer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Quinerly Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Quinerly Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
¶ 11 (2017) (reviewing motion to suppress) ( ¶ 8 (2013)); n.1, ¶ 1 (App. 2000) (reviewing jury instructions) ().
Leon v. Marner 421 P.3d 664 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2018
Leon v. Marner 421 P.3d 664 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2018
State v. Rutledge , , ¶ 15, quoting State v. Strayhand , , 587, , 593 (App. 1995).
State of Arizona v. Sergio Arturo Rojo-Valenzuela 334 P.3d 1276 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
State of Arizona v. Sergio Arturo Rojo-Valenzuela 334 P.3d 1276 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
In doing so, we view the instructions in their entirety to determine whether they accurately reflect the law, and interpret the instruction as a reasonable juror would, (interpreting jury instruction dealing with state’s burden of proof).
State of Arizona v. Travis Hamilton Nereim 317 P.3d 646 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
State of Arizona v. Travis Hamilton Nereim 317 P.3d 646 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
But on appeal, “we do not review a single sentence of jury instructions out of context; rather we view the jury instructions in their entirety in determining whether they adequately reflect the law.”
State v. Dickinson 314 P.3d 1282 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
State v. Dickinson 314 P.3d 1282 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
has stated that instructing a jury on a non-existent theory of criminal liability is fundamental error.” James, 231 Ariz. at 493, ¶ 13 , 297 P.3d at 185 ( ¶ 27 , , Ontiveros, 206 Ariz. at 542, ¶ 17 , 81 P.3d at 333 ; , 392 n. 7, ¶ 12, , 447 n. 7 (App. 2000)).
State v. James 297 P.3d 182 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
State v. James 297 P.3d 182 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
¶ 27 , ¶ 17 , , 392 n. 7, ¶ 12, , 447 n. 7 (App.2000).
State of Arizona v. Armando Galaviz Fierro Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2008
State of Arizona v. Armando Galaviz Fierro Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2008
State v. Moore 189 P.3d 1107 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
State v. Moore 189 P.3d 1107 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
(stating that defendant “points out” that attempted felony murder is not a crime in Arizona), n. 4, ¶ 41 , n. 6, ¶ 9 , (citing Marchesano and stating, in dicta, that “attempted felony murder is not a cognizable crime in Arizona”).
State v. Barraza 170 P.3d 293 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
State v. Ontiveros 81 P.3d 330 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2003
State v. Ontiveros 81 P.3d 330 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2003
¶ 12 n. 7, Curry, 187 Ariz. at 627-28 , 931 P.2d at 1137-38 .
State v. Prasertphong 75 P.3d 675 Ariz. 2003
State v. Prasertphong 75 P.3d 675 Ariz. 2003
The requisite force required for an armed rob *89 bery need only “be used ‘against any person,’ not necessarily only against the person dispossessed of the property.” , ( , ); -94, ¶¶ 17-21 , -49 (App.2000).
State v. Sucharew 66 P.3d 59 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2003
State v. Sucharew 66 P.3d 59 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2003
Thus, we find no error, fundamental or otherwise, in the trial court’s instruction to the jury- ¶ 33 When considering any claim of error in jury instructions, we examine the “instructions in them entirety in determining whether they adequately reflect the law.” , 393 ¶ 15
State of Arizona v. Marcos Antonio Herrera Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2002
State of Arizona v. Marcos Antonio Herrera Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2002
State v. Sierra-Cervantes 37 P.3d 432 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2002
State v. Sierra-Cervantes 37 P.3d 432 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2002
¶ 16 Furthermore, when the claim of error goes to jury instructions, we examine the instructions “in their entirety in determining whether they adequately reflect the law.” , 393 ¶15

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by