Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Myers, 570 P.2d 1252.

124 citing documents.

State v. Griffin Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
State v. Griffin Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
¶14 “The law does not preclude a victim from identifying his attacker, presented alone, at a later time just because the victim could not identify the attacker in a group earlier.”
State v. Johnson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
State v. Johnson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
To rebut this presumption, Johnson needed to show that the court evinced “a hostile feeling or spirit of ill-will, or undue friendship or favoritism.”
Horst v. Horst Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Horst v. Horst Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State v. Balli Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State v. Balli Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
However, Balli has failed to point out any specific comment or action by the court that would show “a hostile feeling or spirit of ill-will.”
rs/se v. Hon. thompson/vanders Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
rs/se v. Hon. thompson/vanders Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
609(d)); (weighing the state’s policy of protecting juvenile offenders against a defendant’s right to confront witnesses).
State v. White Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. White Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Pintarich Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Pintarich Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Barnes Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Barnes Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
(“Within statutory limitations, the sentence is left to the discretion of the trial judge.”).
State v. Billups Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Billups Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Ramos Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Ramos Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
ades/gagliardi v. Gagliardi Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
ades/gagliardi v. Gagliardi Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
See, (to demonstrate bias, party must show “a hostile feeling or spirit of ill-will, or undue friendship or favoritism, towards one of the litigants”).
State v. Sanchez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Sanchez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Yazzie Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Yazzie Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
¶ 12, (“[T]he Supreme Court has .
In the Matter of Lisa M. Aubuchon 309 P.3d 886 Ariz. 2013
In the Matter of Lisa M. Aubuchon 309 P.3d 886 Ariz. 2013
Bias and prejudice are evidenced by “a hostile feeling or spirit of ill-will, or undue friendship or favoritism, towards one of the litigants.”
State of Arizona v. Nathan Andres Leyvas Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2009
State of Arizona v. Nathan Andres Leyvas Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2009
-84, -57 (1977) (after hearing at which victim addressed 4 circumstances surrounding his observation of offender at time of crime, victim’s identification of defendant allowed at trial even though victim “had been unable to identify the defendant
Scheehle v. Justices of the Supreme Court 120 P.3d 1092 Ariz. 2005
Scheehle v. Justices of the Supreme Court 120 P.3d 1092 Ariz. 2005
The fact that a judge may have an opinion as to the merits of the cause or a strong feeling about the type of litigation involved, does not make the judge biased or prejudiced.” ( (quoting In re Guardianship of Styer, 24 Ariz. App. l48, 151, )); Shaman et al., supra, § 4.04, at 113 (“However, neither bias nor prejudice refer to the attitude that a judge may hold about the subject matter of a lawsuit .
State of Arizona v. Jesus Antonio Aleman Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2005
State of Arizona v. Jesus Antonio Aleman Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2005
State v. Flores 986 P.2d 232 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
State v. Flores 986 P.2d 232 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
2041 , 36 L.Ed.2d 854 (1973); , cert.
State v. Atwood 832 P.2d 593 Ariz. 1992
State v. Atwood 832 P.2d 593 Ariz. 1992
State v. Van Den Berg 791 P.2d 1075 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
State v. Van Den Berg 791 P.2d 1075 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
-21 , -40 (1978) (proper to preclude use of witness’ juvenile record when “sought only for the purpose of attacking his general credibility and did not go to a bias or motive for his trial testimony”).
State v. Fulminante 778 P.2d 602 Ariz. 1989
State v. Fulminante 778 P.2d 602 Ariz. 1989
State v. Carver 771 P.2d 1382 Ariz. 1989
State v. Carver 771 P.2d 1382 Ariz. 1989
(absent proof of bias and prejudice, allegation that trial judge felt criminals were being treated too leniently was insufficient to require disqualification), cer t. denied, 435 U.S. 928 , 98 S.Ct.
State v. Calabrese 755 P.2d 1177 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1988
State v. Calabrese 755 P.2d 1177 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1988
State v. Williams 800 P.2d 1240 Ariz. 1987
State v. Williams 800 P.2d 1240 Ariz. 1987
-85 , -58 (1977) (“fact that witnesses were previously unable to identify a defendant should properly go to the credibility and not to the admissibility of subsequent positive in-court identifications”), cert.
Ryan v. State 724 P.2d 1218 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
Ryan v. State 724 P.2d 1218 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by