Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State of Arizona v. Jesus Ramiro Moreno, 340 P.3d 426.

24 citing documents.

State of Arizona v. William Maurice Brown Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2026
State of Arizona v. William Maurice Brown Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
State of Arizona v. Asalia Guadalupe Alvarez-Soto Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2024
State of Arizona v. Asalia Guadalupe Alvarez-Soto Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2024
“We assess the totality of the circumstances from the perspective of ‘an objectively reasonable police officer’ in evaluating the validity of the stop.” (quoting Ornelas, 517 U.S. at 696).
State v. Hall Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
State v. Hall Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
State v. White Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. White Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
5 STATE v. WHITE Decision of the Court decision under Miranda, and we must affirm that decision if it is “legally correct for any reason supported by the record.” ¶ 5 (App. 2014).
State v. Dazen Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Dazen Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
DISCUSSION I. Motion to Suppress ¶8 We defer to the superior court’s factual findings “including findings on credibility and the reasonableness of the inferences drawn by the officer.” ¶ 5 (App. 2014) (citation omitted), and consider only the evidence that was presented at the suppression hearing, ¶ 6 (2010).
State v. Tanner Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Tanner Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
–54, ¶¶ 17, 18 (App. 2014) (affirming a finding of reasonable suspicion because the officer believed, though mistakenly, a vehicle had illegally tinted windows).
State v. Douglas Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Douglas Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
See Heien v. North Carolina, 574 U.S. 54, 57 (2014) (explaining the Fourth Amendment tolerates reasonable mistakes of law and fact); ¶¶ 11, 18 (App. 2014) (upholding a stop when the facts as believed by an officer supported reasonable suspicion for a traffic violation); United States v. Gonzales-Quinonez, 287 F. Supp. 2d 1032, 1037 (D. Ariz. 2003) (finding officer's testimony was sufficient "to demonstrate his reasonable suspicion that there
State v. Haley Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State v. Haley Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
But we also defer to the trial court’s determination of “the reasonableness of the inferences drawn by the officer.” ¶ 5 (App. 2014).
State of Arizona v. Thomas L. Dean 388 P.3d 24 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2017
State of Arizona v. Thomas L. Dean 388 P.3d 24 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2017
And, although we can affirm a trial court’s ruling for any reason supported by the record, , we may not do so with reference to facts not properly in the record before us. 9 *394 ¶ 26 The dissent also asserts that the good-faith exception applies in the absence of “systemic or deliberate police misconduct,” infra ¶34, and correctly observes that our record contains no evi
State v. Manzanares Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Manzanares Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
1 “In reviewing a trial court’s denial of a motion to suppress, we view the facts in the light most favorable to upholding its ruling.” ¶ 2 (App. 2014) (citation omitted).
State v. Malin Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Malin Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
1 “In reviewing a trial court's denial of a motion to suppress, we view the facts in the light most favorable to upholding its ruling.” ¶ 2 (App. 2014).
State of Arizona v. Kyle Andrew Stoll 370 P.3d 1130 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
State of Arizona v. Kyle Andrew Stoll 370 P.3d 1130 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016