Cited by
Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. West, 250 P.3d 1188.
- 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)).
- State v. Wilkins Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
- State v. Wilkins Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
- State v. Allen Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
- State v. Allen Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
- State v. Riggins Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
-
State v. Riggins
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Substantial evidence may be direct or circumstantial and is “such proof that reasonable persons could accept as adequate and sufficient to support a conclusion of defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.” ¶ 16 (2011) (citation omitted).
- State v. Mesa Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
-
State v. Mesa
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
¶ 23 (App. 2018) ( ¶ 15 (2011)).
- State v. Randles Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
- State v. Randles Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
- State v. Grewal Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
- State v. Grewal Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
- State v. McKenzie Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
- State v. Tingue Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
- State v. McKenzie Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
- State v. Tingue Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021