Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Speer, 212 P.3d 787.

67 citing documents.

State of Arizona v. Stephen Douglas Reeves 310 P.3d 970 Ariz. 2013
State of Arizona v. Robert Charles Glissendorf 311 P.3d 244 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2013
State of Arizona v. Robert Charles Glissendorf 311 P.3d 244 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2013
instruction, which permits the jury to draw a negative inference against the state, when “‘(1) the state failed to preserve material and reasonably accessible evidence that had a tendency to exonerate the accused, and (2) there was resulting prejudice.’” Broughton, 156 Ariz. at 399, 752 P.2d at 488, accord State v. Speer, 221 Ariz. 449, ¶ 40
State of Arizona v. Christopher Mathew Payne 306 P.3d 17 Ariz. 2013
State of Arizona v. Christopher Mathew Payne 306 P.3d 17 Ariz. 2013
§ 21-202(B)(4)(c); -55 ¶ 23, -93 (2009).
State of Arizona v. Rodney Eugene Hardy 283 P.3d 12 Ariz. 2012
State of Arizona v. Rodney Eugene Hardy 283 P.3d 12 Ariz. 2012
State v. Speer, 221 Ariz. 449, 462 ¶ 72
State v. Nelson 273 P.3d 632 Ariz. 2012
State v. Nelson 273 P.3d 632 Ariz. 2012
¶36 These rulings are reviewed for an abuse of discretion, ¶ 42, “because the trial judge is always in the best position
State v. Lehr 254 P.3d 379 Ariz. 2011
State v. Lehr 254 P.3d 379 Ariz. 2011
is between material exculpatory evidence and potentially useful evidence.” State v. Speer, 221 Ariz. 449, 457 ¶ 37, (internal quotation marks and citations omitted).
State v. Prince 250 P.3d 1145 Ariz. 2011
State v. Prince 250 P.3d 1145 Ariz. 2011
E.g., Lynch, 225 Ariz. at 35 ¶¶ 27-28, 234 P.3d at 603; State v. Speer, 221 Ariz. 449, 455-56 ¶¶ 27-28, -94 (2009).
State v. Womble 235 P.3d 244 Ariz. 2010
State v. Womble 235 P.3d 244 Ariz. 2010
State v. Cropper 225 P.3d 579 Ariz. 2010
State v. Cropper 225 P.3d 579 Ariz. 2010
¶ 51, (explaining that on independent review the Court “must independently determine whether the State has established the aggravating circumstance beyond a reasonable doubt”).