Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Carver, 771 P.2d 1382.

370 citing documents.

State of Arizona v. Cooperman 282 P.3d 446 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
State of Arizona v. Cooperman 282 P.3d 446 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
(“Although the record contains some conflicting evidence, it was for the jury to weigh the evidence and determine the relied on”); (“opening briefs must present significant arguments” and “[f]ailure to argue a claim usually constitutes abandonment and waiver of that claim”).
Lisa K. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 281 P.3d 1041 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
Lisa K. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 281 P.3d 1041 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
Failure to argue a claim usually constitutes abandonment and waiver of that claim.’”)
State of Arizona v. Jerry Alan Nuckols Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
State of Arizona v. Jerry Alan Nuckols Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
State of Arizona v. Scott Allen King Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2011
State of Arizona v. Scott Allen King Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2011
Failure to argue a claim usually constitutes abandonment and waiver of that claim.”
State v. Lindner 252 P.3d 1033 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
State v. Lindner 252 P.3d 1033 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
[a]n argument which shall contain the contentions of the appellant with respect to the issues presented, and the reasons therefor, with citations to the authorities, statutes and parts of the record relied on.")
Canyon Ambulatory Surgery Center v. SCF Arizona 239 P.3d 733 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
Canyon Ambulatory Surgery Center v. SCF Arizona 239 P.3d 733 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
("[Ojpening briefs must present significant arguments, supported by authority, setting forth an appellant’s position on the issues raised.
State v. Hargrave 234 P.3d 569 Ariz. 2010
State v. West 233 P.3d 1154 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2010
State v. West 233 P.3d 1154 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2010
(“Failure to argue a claim usually constitutes abandonment and waiver of that claim.”).
State v. Hargrave 234 P.3d 569 Ariz. 2010
(noting that failure to “present significant arguments, supported by authority,” “usually constitutes abandonment and waiver of that claim”).
State v. McKenna 214 P.3d 1037 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2009
State v. McKenna 214 P.3d 1037 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2009
P. 31.13(c)(vi) (appellant’s brief must contain argument with citations to authority); n. 9 , , 1147 n. 9 (2004) (" '[OJpening briefs must present significant arguments, supported by authority, setting forth an appellant’s position on the issues raised.’ ”)
State v. Kiles 213 P.3d 174 Ariz. 2009
State v. Kiles 213 P.3d 174 Ariz. 2009
These arguments, however, are waived, because “opening briefs must present significant arguments, supported by authority, setting forth an appellant’s position on the issues raised.”
State of Arizona v. Alvin Edward Williams Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2008
State of Arizona v. Alvin Edward Williams Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2008
State v. Moreno-Medrano 185 P.3d 135 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2008
State v. Moreno-Medrano 185 P.3d 135 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2008
State v. Cruz 181 P.3d 196 Ariz. 2008
State v. Cruz 181 P.3d 196 Ariz. 2008
State ex rel. Thomas v. Duncan 165 P.3d 238 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
State ex rel. Thomas v. Duncan 165 P.3d 238 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
P. 31.13(c)(1) ("An appellant's brief shall include ____ the contentions of the appellant with respect to the issues presented, and the reasons therefor, with citations to the authorities, statutes and parts of the record relied on.”); , ("In Arizona, opening briefs must present significant arguments, supported by authority, setting forth an appellant’s position on the issues raised.
State of Arizona v. Christopher Cruz Cuevas 153 P.3d 414 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
State of Arizona v. Christopher Cruz Cuevas 153 P.3d 414 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
(“[O]pening briefs must present significant arguments, supported by authority, setting forth an appellant’s position on the issues raised.
State v. Cleere 109 P.3d 107 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2005
State v. Cleere 109 P.3d 107 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2005
See *215 , (failure to argue a claim usually constitutes abandonment and waiver of that claim).
State v. Moody 94 P.3d 1119 Ariz. 2004
State v. Moody 94 P.3d 1119 Ariz. 2004
Failure to argue a claim usually constitutes abandonment and waiver of that claim.”
State v. Tucker 68 P.3d 110 Ariz. 2003
State v. Tucker 68 P.3d 110 Ariz. 2003
at 482-83 , 917 P.2d at 211 -12 ( , ); ¶ 9 , (“We reiterate that ineffective assistance of counsel claims are to be brought during Rule 32 proceedings.
State v. Smith 50 P.3d 825 Ariz. 2002
State v. Smith 50 P.3d 825 Ariz. 2002
State v. Blackman 38 P.3d 1192 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2002
State v. Blackman 38 P.3d 1192 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2002
(stating that failure to argue a claim constitutes waiver).
City of Tucson v. Grezaffi 23 P.3d 675 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2001
City of Tucson v. Grezaffi 23 P.3d 675 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2001
3 , (“In Arizona, opening briefs must present significant arguments, supported by authority, setting forth an appellant’s position on the issues raised.”); Brown v. United States Fidelity & Guar.
State v. Bonnewell 2 P.3d 682 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
State v. Bonnewell 2 P.3d 682 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
State v. Whalen 961 P.2d 1051 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1997
State v. Whalen 961 P.2d 1051 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1997
b. Ineffective Assistance of Counsel We do not review an ineffective assistance of counsel claim on direct appeal unless “we may clearly determine from the record that the ineffective assistance claim is meritless.” , see also Ariz.R.Crim.P.
State v. Detrich 932 P.2d 1328 Ariz. 1997
State v. Detrich 932 P.2d 1328 Ariz. 1997
State v. Geotis 930 P.2d 1324 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
State v. Geotis 930 P.2d 1324 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996