Cited by

We will affirm the superior court’s ruling if “legally correct for any reason.”

We will affirm the superior court’s ruling if it is “legally correct for any reason.”

We will affirm the superior court’s ruling if “legally correct for any reason.”

See, e.g., Hernandez, 250 Ariz. at 33, ¶ 19 (finding that because an officer had identified the suspect, the officer was not required to collect fingerprint or DNA evidence to identify the suspect); (concluding that destruction of a video did not prejudice the defendant because an eyewitness identified the defendant and the defendant offered no proof the video would have proven his mistaken identity defense).

We will affirm the superior court’s ruling if “legally correct for any reason.”

¶ 7 (2015) (stating we will affirm a decision that is “legally correct for any reason” ()).

We will affirm the court’s ruling “if the result was legally correct for any reason.”

(“We are obliged to affirm the trial court’s ruling if the result was legally correct for any reason.”).

This court will affirm a trial court’s ruling if “it is legally correct for any reason.” ¶ 7 (2015) ().

Nonetheless, “[w]e are obliged to affirm the trial court’s ruling if the result was legally correct for any reason.”

We review de novo challenges to admissibility based on the Confrontation Clause, ¶ 31 (2008), but review evidentiary decisions for an abuse of discretion, ¶ 77 (2014), and will affirm the decision if correct for any reason

And “[w]e will affirm a trial court’s decision if it is legally correct for any reason.” ¶ 7 (2015) ().

("We are obliged to affirm the trial court's ruling if the result was legally correct for any reason.").

In any event, because “[w]e are obliged to affirm the trial court’s ruling if the result was legally correct for any reason[,]” we need not consider RGS’s diligent prosecution or its failure to prosecute.

We review the court’s legal conclusions de novo, ¶ 27 (2006), and we must affirm the superior court if its ruling “was legally correct for any reason,”

We may affirm the court’s ruling if it was “legally correct for any reason.” Chavez, 225 Ariz. at 443, ¶ 5 ().

We review the court’s ruling for an abuse of discretion, Glissendorf, 235 Ariz. at 150, ¶ 7, and will not upset its decision “if the result was legally correct for any reason,” (citations omitted).

401, 403; ("We are obliged to affirm the trial court's ruling if the result was legally correct for any reason.").

(holding that the trial court has discretion to extend a prescribed deadline by court order, in the interest of justice, “provided involved parties will not be prejudiced thereby”).

v. Dep’t of Child Safety, ¶ 26 (2017) ().