Cited by

Eddington, -21 (1993) (juror need not be stricken for cause when working for different law enforcement agency than testifying officers).

(“[T]he impartiality of a potential juror who is personally acquainted with individuals involved in the prosecution is necessarily suspect, and the trial judge must take care to be certain that the juror can and will be fair and impartial.”).

14 SANCHEZ-RAVUELTA, ET AL. V. YAVAPAI COUNTY, ET AL. Opinion of the Court ¶48 Contrary to the Town’s assertion, which involved a criminal defendant’s allegation that the trial judge denied him due process by failing to preside in an impartial manner.

corroborated [his] statements about the trip.” But Ahrens fails to demonstrate how Sosa’s testimony would have impacted the outcome of his case, so “we cannot know what the proffered testimony would have shown.”

waives the right to raise the issue on appeal.’” (quoting Gendron, 168 Ariz. at 154); (same); (same); (similar); (“Defendant did not object to the instruction at trial.

(failure to rule on fee request); (failure to rule on motion to strike presentence report).

321 (1993) (finding no abuse of discretion in trial court’s refusal to strike police officer for cause).

“Bias and prejudice mean a hostile feeling or spirit of ill will, or undue friendship or favoritism, toward one of the litigants.”

(“A motion that is not ruled on is deemed denied by operation of law.”).

(“A motion that is not ruled on is deemed denied by operation of law.”) (citing cases).

(“We have consistently held that wide latitude is to be given in closing arguments and that counsel may comment on the evidence and argue all reasonable inferences therefrom.”).

“Bias and prejudice mean a hostile feeling or spirit of ill will, or undue friendship or favoritism, toward one of the litigants.”

¶ 22 (App. 2012) (observing that “[w]hen a court fails to expressly rule on a motion, we deem it denied.” ().

Even assuming this court has appellate jurisdiction over the contempt ruling, which typically would be addressed through special action, “when a court fails to expressly rule on a [petition], we deem it denied.” ¶ 22 (App. 2012) ().

(When a court fails to rule on a motion, the appellate court deems it denied.); ¶ 22 (App. 2012).

(noting that a “motion not ruled on is deemed denied by operation of law”).

Nonetheless, “when a court fails to expressly rule on a motion, we deem it denied.” ¶ 22 (App. 2012) ().

(“We have consistently held that wide latitude is to be given in closing arguments and that counsel may comment on the evidence and argue all reasonable inferences therefrom.”).

(extrinsic evidence may not be offered to impeach witness on collateral issue); Ariz. R. Evid.

As to the three motions at issue in this appeal, undecided motions in the trial court are “deemed denied by operation of law.”