Cited by

¶ 1, 514 ¶¶ 9–10 (App. 2010) (addressing termination of probation); –9 ¶¶ 1–2 (App. 2004) (addressing order releasing defendant from incarceration); (addressing denial of motion to withdraw from a plea agreement, and concluding a “‘substantial right’ is implicated because the state ordinarily may withdraw from a plea agreement when the

¶ 3 (App. 2004); ¶ 2 (App. 2001).

¶ 12 (App. 1999); ¶ 3 (App. 2004).

A court abuses its discretion when the reasons given for its decision are unsupported by the record, “clearly untenable, legally incorrect, or amount to a denial of justice.” ¶ 14 (App. 2019); ¶ 3 (App. 2004).

¶ 14 (App. 2019); ¶ 3 (App. 2004).

§ 13-105(5); ¶ 14 (App. 2004).

¶ 3 (App. 2004) ("Generally, a court abuses its discretion where the record fails to provide substantial support for its decision or the court commits an error of law in reaching the decision."

¶ 3 (App. 2004) (“Generally, a court abuses its discretion where the record fails to provide substantial support for its decision[.]”) ( ¶ 2 (App. 2001)).

“A court abuses its discretion if it commits an error of law in reaching its decision.” ¶ 13 (App. 2016) ( ¶ 3 (App. 2004)).

§ 13-756; ¶ 3 (App. 2004).

¶ 3 (App. 2004) (citation omitted).5 In determining whether the trial court abused its discretion we acknowledge that the United States Constitution guarantees defendants “a meaningful opportunity to present a complete defense.” ¶ 36 (App. 2016) (quoting State v. Machado, 224 A

“Generally, a court abuses its discretion where the record fails to provide substantial support for its decision or the court commits an error of law in reaching the decision.” ¶ 3, ( ¶ 2, ) (internal quotation marks omitted).