Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Montano, 589 P.2d 21.

26 citing documents.

State v. Estrada Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
State v. Estrada Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
The testimony of “one witness, if relevant and credible, is sufficient to support a conviction.”
Boozer v. Boozer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Boozer v. Boozer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
§ 25-403.03(C) (providing that domestic violence may be established, inter alia, by “[w]itness testimony”); (“[O]ne witness, if relevant and credible, is sufficient to support a conviction.”).
State v. Royalty Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
State v. Royalty Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
State v. Lohmeier Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
State v. Lohmeier Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
(explaining one credible witness is sufficient to support a conviction).
State v. Garcia Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Garcia Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Jackson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Jackson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
(noting that the “strength or weakness of testimony is not measured by the number of witnesses”).
State v. Jones Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Jones Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
See ¶ 49 (2003) (“[P]hysical evidence is not required to sustain a conviction if the totality of the circumstances demonstrates guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.” (internal citation omitted)); (“[O]ne witness, if relevant and credible, is sufficient to support a conviction.”) (internal citation omitted).
State v. Suazo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Suazo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
¶ 49 (2003) (“[P]hysical evidence is not required to sustain a conviction if the totality of the circumstances demonstrates guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.” (citation omitted)); (“[O]ne witness, if relevant and credible, is sufficient to support a conviction.” (citation omitted)).
State v. Washington Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Washington Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
“The strength or weakness of testimony is not measured by the number of witnesses; one witness, if relevant and credible, is sufficient to support a conviction.” see A.R.S.
State v. Durazo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Durazo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
(affirming conviction for unlawful flight from a law enforcement vehicle where seven witnesses controverted arresting officer’s testimony that he activated the vehicle’s lights and siren).
State v. Ocamb Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Ocamb Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
“The strength or weakness of testimony is not measured by the number of witnesses; one witness, if relevant and credible, is sufficient to support a conviction.”
State v. Cooper 800 P.2d 992 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
State v. Cooper 800 P.2d 992 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
See, , State v. Kovacevich, 26 Ariz.App.
State v. Scrivner 611 P.2d 95 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1979
State v. Scrivner 611 P.2d 95 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1979
In sentencing, “[t]he general character of the party convicted, age, physical *511 health, cooperative attitude, moral character and prior criminal record or lack thereof are valid considerations.”

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by