Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State of Arizona v. Martin David Salazar-Mercado, 325 P.3d 996.

130 citing documents.

State v. Rose 441 P.3d 999 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2019
State v. Rose 441 P.3d 999 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2019
State v. Salazar-Mercado , , ¶ 4, , 997 (2014) ("If a rule's language is plain and unambiguous, *1004 we apply it as written without further analysis.").
State of Arizona v. Erick Antonio Escalante 425 P.3d 1078 Ariz. 2018
State of Arizona v. Erick Antonio Escalante 425 P.3d 1078 Ariz. 2018
State v. Tracey Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Tracey Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
¶ 15 (2014) (“[E]xpert testimony about general behavior patterns of child sexual abuse victims may help the jury understand the evidence.”).
Swvp-Gts Mr v. Pinal County Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Swvp-Gts Mr v. Pinal County Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Calderon-Torres Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Calderon-Torres Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
4, *2 n.2, ¶ 5 (App. 2017) ( ¶ 21 (2014)).
State of Arizona v. Kevin Artice Miles 414 P.3d 680 Ariz. 2018
State of Arizona v. Kevin Artice Miles 414 P.3d 680 Ariz. 2018
Brenda D. v. Dep't of Child Safety 410 P.3d 419 Ariz. 2018
Brenda D. v. Dep't of Child Safety 410 P.3d 419 Ariz. 2018
[and] [w]hen the text is clear and unambiguous, we apply the plain meaning and our inquiry ends.”); ¶ 4 (2014) (“We interpret court rules to effect the rule-makers’ intent, using the same principles we apply when interpreting statutes.”).
State v. Jacobson 418 P.3d 960 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Jacobson 418 P.3d 960 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Salazar-Mercado , , 595, ¶ 21, , 1001 (2014) (noting that "expert testimony about general behavior patterns of child sexual abuse victims may help the jury to understand the evidence," including "possible reasons" for the victims' unusual behavior) (citations omitted).
Brent Randall Phillips v. Hon. o'neil/state Bar Ariz. 2017
Brent Randall Phillips v. Hon. o'neil/state Bar Ariz. 2017
–93 ¶ 7 (2014); ¶ 10 (2001).
State v. Hunter Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Hunter Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Garcia Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Garcia Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
¶ 15 (2014) (“expert testimony about general behavior patterns of child sexual-abuse victims is permitted when helpful for a jury to understand the evidence”); see also Haskie, 399 P.3d at ___, ¶ 12 (noting that in cases involving child victims, “admission of ‘cold’ expert testimony that educates the fact-finder
State of Arizona v. Mark Haskie, Jr. 399 P.3d 657 Ariz. 2017
State of Arizona v. Mark Haskie, Jr. 399 P.3d 657 Ariz. 2017
State v. Tull Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Tull Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Salazar–Mercado, ¶ 13 (2014).
State v. Urrea 398 P.3d 584 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2017
State v. Urrea 398 P.3d 584 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2017
Stafford v. Burns 389 P.3d 76 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Stafford v. Burns 389 P.3d 76 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
¶ 4 (2014) ( ¶ 19 (2012)); ¶¶ 9-10 (App. 2010).
State of Arizona v. Joel Randu Escalante-Orozco 386 P.3d 798 Ariz. 2017
State of Arizona v. Joel Randu Escalante-Orozco 386 P.3d 798 Ariz. 2017
Id.; ¶ 10 n.1, n.1 (2014) (“Expert testimony ‘fits’ if it is sufficiently tied to the facts of the case [so] that it will aid the jury in resolving a factual dispute.” (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)).
State v. Moore Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Moore Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Self Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Self Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
¶14 We generally review a trial court’s admission of expert testimony for an abuse of discretion, ¶ 13 (2014), recognizing the trial court is in the best position to weigh “the usefulness of expert testimony against the danger of unfair prejudice” when addressing “fact-bound inquiries,”
State v. Haskie 378 P.3d 446 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Haskie 378 P.3d 446 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Meyer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Meyer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Salazar–Mercado, ¶ 13 (2014).
State v. Montgomery Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Montgomery Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Saunders Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Saunders Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State of Arizona v. Joseph Javier Romero 365 P.3d 358 Ariz. 2016
State of Arizona v. Joseph Javier Romero 365 P.3d 358 Ariz. 2016
¶ 10, (holding that “cold” expert testimony may be admitted under Rule 702).
State v. Woody Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Woody Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Shook Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Shook Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015