Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State Ex Rel. McDougall v. Corcoran, 735 P.2d 767.

52 citing documents.

State of Arizona v. Dimitri Polanco Romero 556 P.3d 305 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2024
State of Arizona v. Dimitri Polanco Romero 556 P.3d 305 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2024
(“Even where the defendant does not take the stand, the prosecutor may properly comment on the defendant’s failure to present exculpatory evidence which would substantiate defendant’s story .
State v. Cline Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
State v. Cline Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
State v. Gomes Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Gomes Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
(The prosecution’s remarks in closing arguments that the defendant chose not to test a breath sample were “simply comments designed to draw reasonable inferences based on [the defendant’s] failure to present [potentially exculpatory] evidence.”).
State v. Preston Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
State v. Preston Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
(“To the extent that the prosecutor’s statement in rebuttal closing argument may have implied that defendant had the burden of proof, however, the trial court’s cautionary instruction to the jury was sufficient to cure any harm.”).
State v. Castillo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State v. Castillo Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State v. Fields Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State v. Fields Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State of Arizona v. Thomas Michael Riley Ariz. 2020
State of Arizona v. Thomas Michael Riley Ariz. 2020
State v. Muldrow Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Muldrow Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
(“It strikes us as elemental fairness to allow the State to comment upon the defense’s failure to adduce potentially exculpatory evidence to which defendant had access when defendant is attacking the accuracy of the State’s evidence.”).
State v. Garcia Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Garcia Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
(finding comments on defendant’s failure to produce 4 STATE v. GARCIA Decision of the Court evidence was a permissible response to defendant’s arguments about the sufficiency of the investigation).
State v. Francois Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Francois Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
(“It strikes us as elemental fairness to allow the State to comment upon the defense’s failure to adduce potentially exculpatory evidence to which defendant had access when defendant is attacking the accuracy of the State’s evidence.”); –83 (App. 1981) (no misconduct wher
State v. Issa Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Issa Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
–60 (1987) (cautionary instruction that defendant was not required to produce any evidence or prove his innocence was sufficient to cure any harm).
State v. Farnsworth 389 P.3d 88 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2017
State v. Farnsworth 389 P.3d 88 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2017
-93 (App. 2008) (prosecutor’s comments on failure to present evidence do not shift burden of proof to defendant absent comment on defendant’s silence).
State v. Apodaca Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Apodaca Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
State v. Crom Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Crom Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
(“Even where the defendant does not take the stand, the prosecutor may properly comment on the defendant’s failure to present exculpatory evidence which would substantiate defendant’s story.”).
State v. Offret Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Offret Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
(prosecutor may properly comment on defendant’s failure to present exculpatory evidence, as long as it does not constitute a comment on defendant’s 5 The State argues that Defendants waived this argument by not specifically alleging “prosecutorial misconduct” in their objection at trial.
State v. Harrison Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Harrison Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
(“Such comment is permitted by the well recognized principle that the nonproduction of evidence may give rise to the inference that it would have been adverse to the party who could have produced it.”).
State v. Craft Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Craft Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
State v. Superior Court (Corcoran)
State of Arizona v. Shawn De Nean Edmisten Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2009
State of Arizona v. Shawn De Nean Edmisten Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2009
State of Arizona v. Marcos Antonio Herrera Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2002
State of Arizona v. Marcos Antonio Herrera Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2002
State v. Marshall 4 P.3d 1039 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
State v. Marshall 4 P.3d 1039 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
McDougall v. Corcoran (Keen)
MacK v. Cruikshank 2 P.3d 100 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1999
MacK v. Cruikshank 2 P.3d 100 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1999
State v. Corona 932 P.2d 1356 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
State v. Corona 932 P.2d 1356 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
McDougall v. Corcoran (Keen), , the prosecutor was permitted to comment on the defendant’s failure to present exculpatory evidence.
State v. McAnulty 909 P.2d 466 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
State v. McAnulty 909 P.2d 466 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
State v. West 862 P.2d 192 Ariz. 1993
State v. West 862 P.2d 192 Ariz. 1993
Montoya v. Superior Court 840 P.2d 305 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
Montoya v. Superior Court 840 P.2d 305 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992