Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State v. Bible, 858 P.2d 1152.

901 citing documents.

State v. Canales Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Rivera Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
“Error is harmless only if we can say, beyond a reasonable doubt, that it ‘did not contribute to or affect the verdict.’” ¶ 21, ( ).
State v. Robinson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
is not whether, in a trial that occurred without the error, a guilty verdict would surely have been rendered, but whether the guilty verdict actually rendered in this trial was surely unattributable to the error.” ¶ 39, ( ).
State v. Ochoa Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Ochoa Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Nowakowski Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Corrales Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Nowakowski Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Corrales Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State of Arizona v. Shawn Patrick Lynch 357 P.3d 119 Ariz. 2015
State of Arizona v. Shawn Patrick Lynch 357 P.3d 119 Ariz. 2015
Opening statement is not a time to argue the inferences and conclusions that may be drawn from evidence not yet admitted.” (internal citation omitted).
State of Arizona v. Andre Michael Leteve 354 P.3d 393 Ariz. 2015
State of Arizona v. Andre Michael Leteve 354 P.3d 393 Ariz. 2015
“We must be confident beyond a reasonable doubt that the error had no influence on the jury’s judgment.”
State v. Guinard Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Hafen Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Hafen Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Guinard Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
6 STATE v. GUINARD Decision of the Court government behind its witness.”
State v. Cramer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Cramer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Harris Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Harris Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Murrieta Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Murrieta Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
“The inquiry is not whether, in a trial that occurred without the error, a guilty verdict would surely have been rendered, but whether the guilty verdict actually rendered in this trial was surely unattributable to the error.” (quoting Sullivan v. Louisiana, 508 U.S. 275, 279, 113 S. Ct. 2078, 2081, 124 L. Ed. 2d 182 (1993)).
State v. Krauch Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Tacquard Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Tacquard Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Under harmless error review, we will affirm a conviction “if the state, ‘in light of all the evidence,’ can establish beyond a reasonable doubt the error did not contribute to or affect the verdict.” ¶ 11 (2009) ().
State v. Krauch Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
As applicable here, an error is harmless when the State proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the error in admitting the evidence “did not contribute to or affect the verdict or sentence.” ¶ 18, ( ).
State v. Felix 349 P.3d 1117 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Felix 349 P.3d 1117 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State of Arizona v. Tywan Demetrius Woods 348 P.3d 910 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2015
State of Arizona v. Tywan Demetrius Woods 348 P.3d 910 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2015
In a similar context, the jury in State v. Bible heard the victim’s father refer to the defendant as “[t]hat * *]ing a[* *]hole.” , (second and third alteration added, remaining alteration in Bible ).
State v. Satovich Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Satovich Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Swope Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Swope Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
¶11 “When an issue is raised but erroneously ruled on by the trial court, this court reviews for harmless error.”
State v. Sanchez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Sanchez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
“Within reason, a judge does not display bias or cause prejudice when acting sua sponte to control the courtroom and the trial.” see also Liteky, 510 U.S. at 556, 114 S. Ct. at 1157 (“A judge’s ordinary efforts at courtroom administration—even a stern and 4 STATE v. SANCHEZ Decision of the Court short-tempered jud
State v. Robinson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Robinson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Sandoval Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Sandoval Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Garcia-Meza Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Garcia-Meza Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Ocamb Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Ocamb Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Chavez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Chavez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
We give deference to the trial court's ruling because it is in the best position to evaluate “the atmosphere of the trial, the manner in which the objectionable statement was made, and the possible effect it had on the jury and the trial.”
State v. Kummer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Kummer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
(excluding jail time in calculation of remoteness).
State of Arizona v. Jose Raul Juarez-Orci 342 P.3d 856 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2015