Cited by
Opinions in Arizona that cite Castro v. Ballesteros-Suarez, 213 P.3d 197.
- State v. Alliance Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
-
State v. Alliance
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
None of the factors presented in Old West are dispositive or require a court to exonerate a bond, see id., and this court will not substitute its judgment for that of the superior court on these discretionary factors, ¶ 11 (App. 2009).
- State v. Adept Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
-
State v. Adept
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
¶ 11 (App. 2009); (a difference in judicial opinion is not synonymous with an abuse of discretion).
- 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