Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Willits, 393 P.2d 274.

321 citing documents.

State v. Lopez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State v. Lopez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State v. Thomas Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State v. Thomas Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
The record contains sufficient evidence upon which the 2
State v. Garcia Del Castillo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State v. Garcia Del Castillo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
d Garcia Del Castillo timely seeks review of that decision by this court.3 DISCUSSION ¶6 Garcia Del Castillo reiterates three issues he raised with the superior court, arguing his attorney provided ineffective assistance of counsel by failing to (1) allow Garcia Del Castillo to testify at trial; (2) and (3) file a motion to suppress.
State v. Haslock Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State v. Haslock Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State v. Chacon Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State v. Chacon Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State of Arizona v. Thomas Michael Riley Ariz. 2020
State of Arizona v. Thomas Michael Riley Ariz. 2020
–91 (1964); –74 (1951) (holding a self-defense instruction was improper in a civil suit where neither party asserted such a claim and “[t]he instruction was susceptible of conveying the impression to the jury that the trial judge may possibly have thought that [the plaintiff] ha
State v. Hopkins Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State v. Hopkins Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State v. Martinez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State v. Martinez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State v. Reilly Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Reilly Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
4 STATE v. REILLY Decision of the Court I. Appellant’s Request for a Willits Instruction ¶15
State v. Byers Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Byers Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Jackson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Jackson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
¶20 The trial court denied Jackson’s request to provide the jury with a Willits instruction, finding that the recordings and possible metadata, if available, would not tend to exonerate Jackson of the crimes.
State v. Hernandez 443 P.3d 33 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2019
State v. Hernandez 443 P.3d 33 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2019
STARING, Presiding Judge: *35 ¶1 In this appeal from Pablo Isaac Hernandez's conviction for unlawful flight from a law enforcement vehicle, we conclude the trial court erred by not giving an adverse-inference jury instruction based on State v. Willits , , 191
State v. Gaines Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Gaines Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Matta Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Matta Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Before trial, because the police department failed to adequately “preserve” the confrontation call.
State v. Lockett Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Lockett Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
that it could draw an inference “unfavorable to the State” if it found the officer’s explanation for failing to preserve this evidence inadequate.
State of Arizona v. Jose Alejandro Acuna Valenzuela 426 P.3d 1176 Ariz. 2018
State of Arizona v. Jose Alejandro Acuna Valenzuela 426 P.3d 1176 Ariz. 2018
Furthermore, defense counsel’s explicit statement upon reading the instruction (“We are not opposing that, Judge”) establishes the instruction as a “matter[] of fact conceded at trial.” (stating that the trial court may assume “matters of fact conceded at trial or established by uncontradicted or uncontroverted evidence .
State v. Antwine Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Antwine Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Suazo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Suazo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
V. Willits Instruction ¶11
State v. Todd 418 P.3d 1147 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2018
State v. Todd 418 P.3d 1147 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2018
State of Arizona v. Bryan Wayne Hulsey Ariz. 2018
State of Arizona v. Bryan Wayne Hulsey Ariz. 2018
At trial, the court gave a Willits instruction, allowing the jury to infer that the destroyed fragments were not from Hulsey’s gun.
State v. Dillon Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Dillon Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Appellant argues that the trial court abused its discretion in denying his requests for a
State v. Democker Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Democker Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
¶60 based on the State’s failure to adequately preserve bike-tire tracks and shoe-print evidence and a carpet fragment purportedly showing a bloody handprint.
State v. Pistole Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Pistole Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
¶3 On September 4, 2015, during trial and over the state’s objection, the superior court granted defense counsel’s P.2d 274 (1964), based on the state’s failure to preserve a jail video recording of Pistole’s blood draw, which defense counsel argued could have supported his defense of tampering.
State v. Myers Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Myers Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
He argues prosecutorial misconduct denied him a fair trial, P.2d 274 (1964), and that he was improperly sentenced as a category three repetitive offender.
State v. Matta Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Matta Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
After a hearing, the court denied the motion, finding the State had complied with disclosure obligations and that Matta had not shown the police failed to preserve any 3 STATE v. MATTA Decision of the Court exculpatory evidence, but that a might be appropriate.