Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Piatt, 644 P.2d 881.

30 citing documents.

State v. Wallace Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State v. Wallace Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
“In this case, the jury heard each witness testify and was able to evaluate his or her veracity.” The State also alleged one count of refusing to provide a truthful name when lawfully detained, a class two misdemeanor.
State v. Tran Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Tran Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
-51, -87 (1981) (stating the jury has the discretion to determine the credibility of witnesses and to evaluate the weight and sufficiency of the evidence).
State v. Angulo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Angulo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
-51, -87 (1981) (stating the jury has the discretion to determine credibility of witnesses and to evaluate the weight and sufficiency of the evidence) (citations omitted).
State v. Humelhans Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Humelhans Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Green 29 P.3d 271 Ariz. 2001
State v. Green 29 P.3d 271 Ariz. 2001
(citing to “[t]he Advisory Committee’s Note attending Rule 601 of the Federal Rules of Evidence, which Arizona adopted with little variation”).
Zimmer v. Peters 861 P.2d 1188 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
Zimmer v. Peters 861 P.2d 1188 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
The question is one particularly suited to the jury as one of weight and credibility, subject to judicial authority to review the sufficiency of the evidence.”
Matter of Wolfram 847 P.2d 94 Ariz. 1993
Matter of Wolfram 847 P.2d 94 Ariz. 1993
2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984)
State v. Apodaca 801 P.2d 1177 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1990
State v. Apodaca 801 P.2d 1177 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1990
State v. White 747 P.2d 613 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
State v. White 747 P.2d 613 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
State v. Tyler 718 P.2d 214 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
State v. Tyler 718 P.2d 214 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
In Re the Appeal in Pinal County Juvenile Action Nos. J-1123 & J-1124 709 P.2d 1361 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1985
In Re the Appeal in Pinal County Juvenile Action Nos. J-1123 & J-1124 709 P.2d 1361 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1985
State v. Williams, supra
State v. White 697 P.2d 328 Ariz. 1985
State v. White 697 P.2d 328 Ariz. 1985
Considering the evidence in a light most favorable to sustaining the conviction as we must, , , , we find no error.
Murphy v. SUPER. CT. IN & FOR MARICOPA COUNTY 689 P.2d 532 Ariz. 1984
Murphy v. SUPER. CT. IN & FOR MARICOPA COUNTY 689 P.2d 532 Ariz. 1984
State v. Roberts 677 P.2d 280 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
State v. Roberts 677 P.2d 280 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1983
(affirmed trial court's denial because it was doubtful the defendant's psychiatrist would have helped the jury to better evaluate the witness' credibility); , (also affirmed trial court's denial because the defendant's offer of proof was in
State v. Melendez 661 P.2d 654 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1982
State v. Melendez 661 P.2d 654 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1982