Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. West, 250 P.3d 1188.

696 citing documents.

State v. Aguirre 527 P.3d 894 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
State v. Aguirre 527 P.3d 894 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
State v. Olivier Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
State v. Olivier Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
“[T]he relevant question is whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.” ¶ 16 (2011) (citations and internal quotation marks omitted).
State v. Newman Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
State v. Newman Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
State v. Gollihar Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
State v. Gollihar Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
State v. Gaspar Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Gaspar Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State of Arizona v. Brian Matthew MacHardy 521 P.3d 613 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2022
State of Arizona v. Brian Matthew MacHardy 521 P.3d 613 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2022
State v. Farnberg Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Farnberg Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Gomes Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Gomes Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Garcia Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Garcia Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Daniel Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Daniel Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Williams Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Williams Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Godoy Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Godoy Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Snider, 233 Ariz. at 245, ¶ 4 ( ¶ 15 (2011)).
State v. Cawthon Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Cawthon Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Criminal Rule 20; ¶ 6 (2011).
State v. Thompson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Thompson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Smith Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Smith Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Etienne Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Etienne Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
¶10 We review claims of insufficient evidence de novo, ¶ 15 (2011), and our review is limited to whether substantial evidence exists to support the verdict, Ariz. R. Crim.
State v. Geri Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Geri Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Parra Carranza Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Parra Carranza Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Rodriguez v. Rodriguez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Rodriguez v. Rodriguez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Calandra Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Calandra Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Heering Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Heering Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Buzan Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Buzan Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State of Arizona v. Kenneth Wayne Thompson II 502 P.3d 437 Ariz. 2022
State of Arizona v. Kenneth Wayne Thompson II 502 P.3d 437 Ariz. 2022
See State v. (Randall) West, ¶ 16 (2011).
State v. Woods Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Morrison Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Morrison Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Woods Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
We review the denial of a Rule 20 motion for a judgment of acquittal de novo, and will uphold such decision if, “after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.” ¶ 9 (App. 2017) ( ¶ 16 (2011)).

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by