Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Castro v. Ballesteros-Suarez, 213 P.3d 197.

140 citing documents.

Phillips v. Cabrera Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Phillips v. Cabrera Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
-52, ¶¶ 11-12 (App. 2009) (citations omitted).
Romero v. Langston Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Romero v. Langston Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Evidence is substantial if it allows “a reasonable person to reach the [jury’s] result.” ¶ 11 (App. 2009)( ¶ 18 (App. 2005)).
Ellesse J. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Ellesse J. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
¶ 11 (App. 2009) (quotations omitted).
Hobbs v. State Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Hobbs v. State Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Castro v. Ballesteros– Suarez, ¶ 11 (App. 2009).
Lakeside v. Meyers Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Lakeside v. Meyers Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Ida v. Leach Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Atr v. Cec Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Ida v. Leach Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
–52, ¶¶ 11–12 (App. 2009).
Atr v. Cec Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Cynthia G. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Larmer v. Larmer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Cynthia G. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
To prove the statutory ground, “[c]ircumstantial evidence has the same probative value as direct evidence.” ¶ 21 (App. 2009).
Larmer v. Larmer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
¶ 11, (appellate court does not reweigh the evidence or substitute its evaluation of the facts) (citation omitted).
Santorii v. MartinezRusso, LLC 381 P.3d 248 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Tran Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Santorii v. MartinezRusso, LLC 381 P.3d 248 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Tran Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Lewis v. Lynch Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Lewis v. Lynch Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Rivera Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Rivera Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
¶ 21 (App. 2009) (“Circumstantial evidence has the same probative value as direct evidence.”).
Trkula v. Trkula Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Trkula v. Trkula Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Estate of Butwin v. Estate of Butwin 371 P.3d 666 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Estate of Butwin v. Estate of Butwin 371 P.3d 666 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Jose N. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Jose N. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
at 131, 840 P.2d at 307; n.2, n.2 (1994); ¶ 20
Beau Hodai v. the City of Tucson and Tucson Police Department 365 P.3d 959 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
Beau Hodai v. the City of Tucson and Tucson Police Department 365 P.3d 959 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
(finding is clearly erroneous where “‘reviewing court on the entire evidence is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed’”), quoting United States v. U.S. Gypsum Co., 333 U.S. 364, 395 (1948); -01 (App. 2009) (finding of fact clearly erroneous if unsupported by such substantial evidence as would allow “‘a reasonable person to reach the trial court’s result’”), cf. Morgan, 13 Ariz. App. at 195, 475 P.2d at
Burley v. Ali Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Burley v. Ali Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
3 BURLEY v. ALI Decision of the Court in a light most favorable to sustaining the verdict.” ¶ 11 (App. 2009) (internal citation omitted).
Lattimore v. Boyd Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Lattimore v. Boyd Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
-52, ¶ 11, -01 (App. 2009).
Williams v. Cole Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Williams v. Cole Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014