Cited by

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

130 citing documents.

State of Arizona v. Richard Portugal Ortiz 360 P.3d 125 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2015
State of Arizona v. Richard Portugal Ortiz 360 P.3d 125 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2015
We review a trial court’s ruling on the admissibility of expert testimony for an abuse of discretion, viewing “the evidence in the ‘light most favorable to its proponent, maximizing its probative value and minimizing its prejudicial 2The counts of which Ortiz was acquitted were alleged to have occurred on different dates and at different places from the counts of which he was
State v. Rustin Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Rustin Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
¶ 15, (holding “cold expert” testimony satisfied Rule 702(a) because it “might have helped the jury to understand possible reasons for the delayed and inconsistent reporting” by sexual abuse victims).
State v. Holmes Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Holmes Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Roberto F. v. Department of Child Safety 352 P.3d 909 Ariz. 2015
Roberto F. v. Department of Child Safety 352 P.3d 909 Ariz. 2015
Don C. Robertson v. Robert E. Alling Ariz. 2015
Robertson v. Alling 351 P.3d 352 Ariz. 2015
Robertson v. Alling 351 P.3d 352 Ariz. 2015
Don C. Robertson v. Robert E. Alling Ariz. 2015
State of Arizona v. Michael Jonathon Carlson 351 P.3d 1079 Ariz. 2015
State of Arizona v. Michael Jonathon Carlson 351 P.3d 1079 Ariz. 2015
State of Arizona v. Hon. bernstein/herman 349 P.3d 200 Ariz. 2015
State of Arizona v. Hon. bernstein/herman 349 P.3d 200 Ariz. 2015
¶9 We review the interpretation of court rules de novo, ¶ 4, but we review a trial court’s exclusion of evidence for an abuse of discretion, ¶ 66
State v. Giron Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Giron Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
¶ 15, (holding Dutton’s “cold expert” testimony satisfied Rule 702(a) because it “might have helped the jury to understand possible reasons for the .
State v. Patton Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Patton Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
The Arizona Supreme Court has held that “expert testimony about general behavior patterns of child sexual abuse victims may help the jury understand the evidence.” ¶¶ 14–15
State v. Garcia-Meza Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Garcia-Meza Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
¶ 15, (holding Dutton’s “cold expert” testimony satisfied Rule 702(a) because it “might have helped the jury to understand possible reasons for the delayed and inconsistent reporting”).
State v. Ketchner 339 P.3d 645 Ariz. 2014
State of Arizona v. Darrell Bryant Ketchner Ariz. 2014
State of Arizona v. Darrell Bryant Ketchner Ariz. 2014
¶ 15, (noting that expert testimony about general behavior patterns of child sexual-abuse victims is permitted when helpful for a jury to understand the evidence).
State v. Ketchner 339 P.3d 645 Ariz. 2014
594 ¶ 15, (noting that expert testimony about general behavior patterns of child sexual-abuse victims is permitted when helpful for a jury to understand the evidence).
State v. Wells Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Wells Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Felipe v. Theme Tech Corp. 334 P.3d 210 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Felipe v. Theme Tech Corp. 334 P.3d 210 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
See, -93, ¶ 7-10, -99 (2014).