Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Bishop, 781 P.2d 581.

30 citing documents.

State v. Sills Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
State v. Sills Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Although the Arizona Supreme Court formerly endorsed that distinction, –05 5 STATE v. SILLS Decision of the Court I. Newly Discovered Evidence.
State v. Young Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Young Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
107, 585 (1989) (holding that a trial court decides the credibility and weight to be given expert testimony, and may consider its own observations of a defendant in determining competency).
Helland v. Helland 337 P.3d 562 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Helland v. Helland 337 P.3d 562 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
(stating that a trial judge is not required to wholly accept or reject expert testimony).
State v. Glassel 116 P.3d 1193 Ariz. 2005
State v. Glassel 116 P.3d 1193 Ariz. 2005
See State v. Arnoldi, 176 Ariz. 236, 239, - 12 - (holding that a trial judge can rely on personal observations in determining competency) ( 107, 585 (1989)).
State v. Murdaugh 97 P.3d 844 Ariz. 2004
State v. Murdaugh 97 P.3d 844 Ariz. 2004
“Thus, [the court considers] the facts in a light most favorable to sustaining the trial court’s finding.” , ( , ).
State v. Moody 94 P.3d 1119 Ariz. 2004
State v. Moody 94 P.3d 1119 Ariz. 2004
Nordstrom, Inc. v. Maricopa County 88 P.3d 1165 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
Nordstrom, Inc. v. Maricopa County 88 P.3d 1165 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
State v. Kayer 984 P.2d 31 Ariz. 1999
State v. Kayer 984 P.2d 31 Ariz. 1999
(citing Sieling v. Eyman, 478 F.2d 211, 215 (9th Cir.1973))
State v. Djerf 959 P.2d 1274 Ariz. 1998
State v. Djerf 959 P.2d 1274 Ariz. 1998
State v. Lara 880 P.2d 1124 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1994
State v. Lara 880 P.2d 1124 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1994
Considering “the facts in a light most favorable to sustaining the trial court’s finding,” State v. Bishop (Bishop III), , we disagree.
State v. Arnoldi 860 P.2d 503 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1993
State v. Arnoldi 860 P.2d 503 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1993
State v. Medrano 844 P.2d 560 Ariz. 1992
State v. Medrano 844 P.2d 560 Ariz. 1992
State v. Conde 846 P.2d 843 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
State v. Conde 846 P.2d 843 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
State v. Brewer 826 P.2d 783 Ariz. 1992
State v. Brewer 826 P.2d 783 Ariz. 1992
Fry's Food Stores v. Industrial Commission 776 P.2d 797 Ariz. 1989
Fry's Food Stores v. Industrial Commission 776 P.2d 797 Ariz. 1989
(expert testimony is merely evidence the trier of fact considers and weighs).