Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Carlos, 17 P.3d 118.

42 citing documents.

State v. Termini Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
State v. Termini Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
¶ 24 (App. 2001) (noting that the erroneous preclusion of evidence is harmless if it “would have been merely cumulative of other evidence in the case”).
Cardona v. Ivory Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
Cardona v. Ivory Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
Nava-Cruz v. Wallace Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
Nava-Cruz v. Wallace Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
State v. Stevens Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State v. Stevens Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State v. Malone 425 P.3d 592 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2018
State v. Malone 425 P.3d 592 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2018
State v. Carlos , , ¶ 24
State v. Clow Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Clow Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
¶ 10, (citation omitted).
State v. Leon Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Leon Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Uriarte-Velazquez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Uriarte-Velazquez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Robinson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Robinson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
We will reverse a conviction based upon insufficient evidence “only if no substantial evidence supports [it].” ¶ 11, ( ¶ 7, ).
State of Arizona v. Veronica Sanchez-Equihua 326 P.3d 321 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
State of Arizona v. Veronica Sanchez-Equihua 326 P.3d 321 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
State of Arizona v. James Darrell Johnson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
State of Arizona v. James Darrell Johnson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
¶4 We will reverse the trial court’s ruling “only if there is a complete absence of substantial evidence to support the charges.”
State of Arizona v. Robert Arthur Ergonis Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2010
State of Arizona v. Robert Arthur Ergonis Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2010
¶16 We evinced the same view, albeit in dicta
State v. Tillmon 216 P.3d 1198 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
State v. Tillmon 216 P.3d 1198 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
¶ 18 We review a “trial court’s denial of a Rule 20 motion for an abuse of discretion and will reverse a conviction only if there is a complete absence of substantial evidence to support the charges.” ¶ 7
State of Arizona v. Frank Joseph Sarullo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2008
State of Arizona v. Frank Joseph Sarullo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2008
(Pelander, J., dissenting) (defendant has right to present own witnesses, including right to subpoena victim as witness).
State of Arizona v. Zachary Samuel Eggers Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
State of Arizona v. Zachary Samuel Eggers Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
State of Arizona v. Robert Joseph Wright Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
State of Arizona v. Robert Joseph Wright Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
State v. Ross 151 P.3d 1261 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
State v. Ross 151 P.3d 1261 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
oMy if there is a complete absence of substantial evidence to support the charges.” ¶ 7
State of Arizona v. Robert Michael Hollenback Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2005
State of Arizona v. Robert Michael Hollenback Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2005
Ry-Tan Construction, Inc. v. Washington Elementary School District No. 6 93 P.3d 1095 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
Ry-Tan Construction, Inc. v. Washington Elementary School District No. 6 93 P.3d 1095 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
State of Arizona v. Tyrone Vaughn Henry Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2003
State of Arizona v. Tyrone Vaughn Henry Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2003
State v. Benenati 52 P.3d 804 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2002
State v. Benenati 52 P.3d 804 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2002

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by