DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. McGuire, 555 P.2d 330.

28 citing documents.

  • State v. Ramirez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
  • State v. Ramirez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
  • State v. Black Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
  • State v. Black Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
    and establish the defendant as the person to whom the document refers.” (-75 (1976), ); (identifying limited exceptions to the standard procedure outlined in Lee).
  • STATE OF ARIZONA v. THOMAS GREG McCURDY Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
  • STATE OF ARIZONA v. THOMAS GREG McCURDY Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
    (approving retrial of prior conviction allegation); (production of additional evidence to establish sentencing factors after remand does not violate constitutional protection against double jeopardy).
  • State v. Speers 98 P.3d 560 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
  • State v. Speers 98 P.3d 560 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
    “Evidence is collateral if it could not properly be offered for any purpose independent of the contradiction.” , ( , ).
  • State v. Hill 848 P.2d 1375 Ariz. 1993
  • State v. Hill 848 P.2d 1375 Ariz. 1993
    see also 1 Morris K. Udall et al., Arizona Practice: Law of Evidence § 44 (3d ed. 1991) (hereinafter “Law of Evidence”); Rule 608(b), Ariz.R.Evid., 17A A.R.S.
  • State v. Johnson 745 P.2d 81 Ariz. 1987
  • State v. Johnson 745 P.2d 81 Ariz. 1987
  • State v. Stotts 695 P.2d 1110 Ariz. 1985
  • State v. Stotts 695 P.2d 1110 Ariz. 1985
    “ ‘Certified copies’ cannot and does not mean copies of certified copies.”
  • State v. Hauss 681 P.2d 382 Ariz. 1984
  • State v. Hauss 681 P.2d 382 Ariz. 1984
    ” We affirm our holding in Lee subject to two very limited exceptions.
  • State v. Munguia 668 P.2d 912 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1983
  • State v. Munguia 668 P.2d 912 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1983
  • Public Service Co. of Oklahoma v. Bleak 656 P.2d 600 Ariz. 1982
  • Public Service Co. of Oklahoma v. Bleak 656 P.2d 600 Ariz. 1982
    One formulation of the test is “could the fact, as to which error is predicated, have been shown in evidence for any purpose independently of the contradiction?” , (quoting 3A Wigmore, Wigmore on Evidence § 1003 (Chadbourn rev. 1970)).
  • State v. Marquez 617 P.2d 787 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980
  • State v. Marquez 617 P.2d 787 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980
    36 , , do not apply in that those cases involved enhanced punishment under Arizona’s former recidivist statute, A.R.S.
  • State v. Acree 588 P.2d 836 Ariz. 1978
  • State v. Acree 588 P.2d 836 Ariz. 1978
    Arizona has long adhered to the general rule that impeachment may not go to collateral or irrelevant matters, e. g., , and the Federal Rules of Evidence have not displaced this rule.
  • State v. Greer 576 P.2d 1004 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1978
  • State v. Greer 576 P.2d 1004 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1978
    our Supreme Court held that copies of certified copies cannot be admitted into evidence, and that their use amounts to erroneous use of hearsay evidence.
  • State v. Lee 559 P.2d 657 Ariz. 1976
  • State v. Lee 559 P.2d 657 Ariz. 1976