Cited by
Opinions in Arizona that cite In Re Andrew A., 58 P.3d 527.
- In Re Delinquency of A.S. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
- In Re Delinquency of A.S. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
- In Re Joseph G. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
-
In Re Joseph G.
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
“We will not reweigh evidence, but look only to determine if there is sufficient evidence to sustain the juvenile court’s ruling.” ¶ 9 (App. 2002).
- In Re Brigham H. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
- In Re Brigham H. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
- In Re Monteith C. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
-
In Re Monteith C.
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
¶ 10 (App. 2005); ¶ 9 (App. 2002).
- In Re Jordan M. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
-
In Re Jordan M.
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
We review the record “only to determine if there is sufficient evidence to sustain the juvenile court’s ruling.” ¶ 9 (App. 2002).
- In Re Colson D. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
-
In Re Colson D.
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
¶ 9 (App. 2002) ("While [the] juvenile denied that he stole the vehicle .
- In Re Tommy G. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
- In Re Tommy G. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
- In Re James W. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
- In Re James W. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
- In Re Kaden V. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
-
In Re Kaden V.
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
“We will not reweigh evidence, but look only to determine if there 3 IN RE KADEN V. Decision of the Court is sufficient evidence to sustain the juvenile court’s ruling.” ¶ 9 (App. 2002).
- In Re Toure K. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
- In Re Toure K. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
- In Re Fernando S. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
-
In Re Fernando S.
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
¶ 5 (App. 2002) (citing Maricopa Cty.
- In Re Reynaldo P. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
-
In Re Reynaldo P.
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
¶ 9 (App. 2002) (appellate court does not reweigh evidence but determines only whether reasonable evidence supports restitution order); -66, ¶¶ 8-16 (App. 1999) (order requiring juvenile to pay $6,000 in restitution three days before her eighteenth birthday was not punitive in
- State v. Jackson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
-
State v. Jackson
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
¶ 2 (App. 2009) ( ¶ 5 (App. 2002)).
- State v. Linares 388 P.3d 566 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
-
State v. Linares
388 P.3d 566
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
However, “we view the facts in the light most favorable to affirming the court’s findings.” ¶ 5 (App. 2002) (citation omitted).
- Renee P., Richard P. v. Dcs, A.P. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
- Renee P., Richard P. v. Dcs, A.P. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
- State v. Lewis 214 P.3d 409 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2009
- State v. Lewis 214 P.3d 409 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2009