Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Geeslin, 225 P.3d 1129.

27 citing documents.

State v. Brown Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
support the action of the trial court.” ¶ 5 (2010) (cleaned up).
Terrell v. Beck Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
Terrell v. Beck Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
the missing portions support the [superior court’s] actions”); ¶ 5 (2010) (“When ‘matters are not included in the record on appeal, the missing portions of 4 TERRELL v. BECK Decision of the Court the record will be presumed to support the action of the trial court.’”) (quotin
State of Arizona v. Bayron Perez Agueda 513 P.3d 1112 Ariz. 2022
State of Arizona v. Bayron Perez Agueda 513 P.3d 1112 Ariz. 2022
State v. Jacques Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State v. Jacques Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
committed the charged conduct is not included in the record on appeal.3 ¶ 5 (2010) (stating the general rule that an appellant bears burden of making record of trial error and matters missing from that record are presumed to support the trial court’s ruling).
State of Arizona v. Bryan Wayne Hulsey Ariz. 2018
State of Arizona v. Bryan Wayne Hulsey Ariz. 2018
State v. Brakhop Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Brakhop Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Wise Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Wise Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Lua, 237 Ariz. at 303, ¶ 5 ( ¶ 9 (2010)).
State of Arizona v. Christepher E. Lua 350 P.3d 805 Ariz. 2015
State of Arizona v. Christepher E. Lua 350 P.3d 805 Ariz. 2015
State v. Fouch Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Fouch Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
¶ 13, (applying the applicable requirements set forth in Rule 17.2 to Rule 17.6) vacated in part on other grounds by P.3d 1129 (2010).
State v. Kummer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Kummer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
¶ 14, (citing Morales, 215 Ariz. at 61, ¶ 10, 157 P.3d at 481, ¶ 4, ), vacated in part on other grounds, P.3d 1129 (2010).
State of Arizona v. George Anthony Dominguez Jr. 338 P.3d 966 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
State of Arizona v. George Anthony Dominguez Jr. 338 P.3d 966 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
State v. Layman Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Layman Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
¶ 13, vacated in part on other grounds, ¶ 1, see also Morales, 215 Ariz. at 60, ¶ 1, 157 P.3d at 480.
State v. Gonzales 314 P.3d 582 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
State v. Gonzales 314 P.3d 582 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
Morales, 215 Ariz. at 62, ¶ 13 , 157 P.3d at 482 (holding that a remand was unnecessary because the certified copies of defendant’s prior convictions already in the record conclusively disproved prejudice resulting from the omission of a Rule 17.6 colloquy); ¶¶ 19-20 , vacated in part on other grounds, , -91, ¶¶ 20-22 , -92 (App.2007).
State v. Bunting 246 P.3d 352 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
State v. Bunting 246 P.3d 352 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
nal rights must be voluntary and intelligent"); ¶¶ 14-15 , (finding that if a defendant is sentenced as a repeat offender, a court's failure to find prior felony convictions or to obtain a voluntary and intelligent admission pursuant to Rule 17.6 constitutes fundamental error)