Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Alice M. v. Department of Child Safety, 345 P.3d 125.

30 citing documents.

In Re Term of Parental Rights as to Ij and Aj Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
In Re Term of Parental Rights as to Ij and Aj Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
See Alice M. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, ¶ 12 (App. 2015).
Murphy v. Stidham Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Murphy v. Stidham Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Alice M. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, ¶ 12 (App. 2015) (citation omitted).
In Re Term of Parental Rights as to Y.G. and Y.G. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
In Re Term of Parental Rights as to Y.G. and Y.G. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
Brenda D. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, ¶ 15 (2018); Alice M. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, ¶ 7 (App. 2015).
In Re Term of Parental Rights as to D.C. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
In Re Term of Parental Rights as to D.C. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
we will not disturb them on appeal.” Alice M. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, –74, ¶ 13 (App. 2015).
Jorden B. v. Dcs, L.B. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Jorden B. v. Dcs, L.B. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Alice M. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, ¶ 10 (App. 2015).
Snook v. Aguilar Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Snook v. Aguilar Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
See Thomas, 203 Ariz. at 36, ¶ 7; Alice M. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, ¶ 7 (App. 2015).
Shawna N., John N. v. Dcs, H.N. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Shawna N., John N. v. Dcs, H.N. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
-73, ¶¶ 9-11 (App. 2015).3 B. 15-Months' Out-of-Home Care.
Keith R. v. Dcs, A.K. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Keith R. v. Dcs, A.K. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Harmless error is not grounds for reversal; an error is harmless when “the reviewing court can say beyond a reasonable doubt that the error did not contribute to the verdict.” Alice M. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, ¶ 12 (App. 2015).
Thomas M. v. Danette G., G.M. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Thomas M. v. Danette G., G.M. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Alice M. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, ¶ 12 (App. 2015) ( ¶ 39 (2004)); see also J & B Motors, (exclusion of admissible evidence is not reversible error if in all probability its admission would not have changed the result).
Lucian B. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Lucian B. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Ct. 44(B)(2)(e) and 45; Alice M. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, -73 ¶¶ 7-11 (App. 2015).
Nicole M. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Nicole M. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Sec., 5 NICOLE M. v. DCS, et al. Decision of the Court -83, ¶ 19 (App. 2005) (citation omitted); see also Alice M. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, ¶ 12 (App. 2015) (applying harmless error analysis to the juvenile court’s error) (citation omitted).
Burns v. Burns Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Burns v. Burns Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Alice M. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, ¶ 7, ¶ 6
Teresa F. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Teresa F. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
waive[s] her objections to the admission of the exhibits.” Alice M. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, ¶ 11 (App. 2015).
Bethany C. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Bethany C. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Sec., ¶ 12, (providing that even if the juvenile court erred in admitting disputed exhibits, the error was harmless).
Guy N. v. Dcs, B.N. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Guy N. v. Dcs, B.N. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
See Alice M. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, ¶ 12, (noting that even if juvenile court erred in admitting disputed exhibits, the error was harmless); ¶ 39, (noting that error is harmless when “the reviewing court can say beyond a reasonable doubt that the err