17 Arizona opinions name it 2 courts 1958–2026 7 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Arizona courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Calderagreen2 sentences2025See Salazar, 173 Ariz. at 408 ; see also State v. Caldera, 141 Ariz. 634, 637 (1984) (noting that if a defendant “produces evidence that he simply did not commit the offense and the state produces evidence that he committed the offense as charged,” “there is usually little evidence [in] the record to support an instruction on . . . lesser included offenses.” (citation omitted)). 2020However, “[a]s a practical matter, when a defendant asserts an all-or-nothing defense . . . there will ‘usually [be] little evidence on the record to support an instruction on the [lesser- included] offenses.’” Wall, 212 Ariz. at 6 , ¶ 29 (quoting State v. Caldera, 141 Ariz. 634, 637 (1984)). | 4 | 6 |
State v. Wallgreen2 sentences2022“As a practical matter, when a defendant asserts an all- or-nothing defense[,] . . . there will ‘usually [be] little evidence on the record to support an instruction on the lesser included offenses.’” Wall, 212 Ariz. at 6, ¶ 29 (citation omitted). 2020However, “[a]s a practical matter, when a defendant asserts an all-or-nothing defense . . . there will ‘usually [be] little evidence on the record to support an instruction on the [lesser- included] offenses.’” Wall, 212 Ariz. at 6 , ¶ 29 (quoting State v. Caldera, 141 Ariz. 634, 637 (1984)). | 2 | 4 |
State v. Salazargreen2 sentences2025See Salazar, 173 Ariz. at 408 ; see also State v. Caldera, 141 Ariz. 634, 637 (1984) (noting that if a defendant “produces evidence that he simply did not commit the offense and the state produces evidence that he committed the offense as charged,” “there is usually little evidence [in] the record to support an instruction on . . . lesser included offenses.” (citation omitted)). 2022“When the record is such that defendant is either guilty of the crime charged or not guilty, the trial court should refuse a lesser included instruction.” State v. Salazar, 173 Ariz. 399, 408 (1992). ¶16 Here, the record discloses overwhelming evidence of Stewart’s guilt on the charged offenses, including a video recording of his detailed confession. | 2 | 2 |
Adams v. Valley Nat. Bank of Ariz.green1 sentence2026See Adams v. Valley Nat'l Bank of Ariz., 139 Ariz. 340, 343 (App. 1984) ("We are not required to assume the duties of an advocate and search voluminous records and exhibits to substantiate an appellant's claims."). | 1 | 1 |
Walsh v. Walshgreen1 sentence2023“We will reverse only if the complaining party suffers prejudice as a result of the error.” Walsh v. Walsh, 230 Ariz. 486, 494, ¶ 24 (App. 2012) (citation omitted). ¶40 Father cites to nothing in the record to support his claim that he was denied sufficient time to present his case. | 1 | 1 |
Marriage of MacMillan v. Schwartzgreen1 sentence2023See MacMillan v. Schwartz, 226 Ariz. 584 , 591 ¶ 33 (App. 2011) (“Merely mentioning an argument in an appellate opening brief is insufficient.”). | 1 | 1 |
State Ex Rel. Department of Economic Security v. Burtongreen1 sentence2021Sec. v. Burton, 205 Ariz. 27, 30, ¶ 14 (App. 2003). ¶8 Mercier correctly notes that the superior court granted a 14- day continuance and Rule of Procedure for Eviction Action 11(c) states "[n]o continuance of more than . . . ten days in superior courts may be ordered unless both parties are in agreement." However, Mercier fails to cite any evidence in the record to support his claim that he objected to the November 5 continuance. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Suarezgreen1 sentence2018See Suarez, 23 Ariz. App. at 46 . ¶11 Benjamin also alleged a claim of ineffective assistance of post- conviction relief counsel. | 1 | 1 |
Upton v. East-West Realty Co.green2 sentences2015Upton v. East-West Realty Co., 81 Ariz. 58, 60 , 299 P.2d 646, 647 (1956); see also Ariz. R. 2015Upton v. East-West Realty Co., 81 Ariz. 58, 60 , 299 P.2d 646, 647 (1956); see also Ariz. R. | 1 | 1 |
City of Phoenix v. Camfieldgreen2 sentences1966Appellant contends further that the trial court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on the law regarding “unavoidable accident.” Since the trial of this case, it has been definitely established by our Supreme Court that “* * * it is always error to give an instruction on unavoidable accident * * City of Phoenix v. Camfield, 97 Ariz. 316, 324 , 400 P.2d 115, 121 (1965). 1966Appellant contends further that the trial court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on the law regarding “unavoidable accident.” Since the trial of this case, it has been definitely established by our Supreme Court that “* * * it is always error to give an instruction on unavoidable accident * * City of Phoenix v. Camfield, 97 Ariz. 316, 324 , 400 P.2d 115, 121 (1965). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Arizona. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Michael Soto v. Anthony M Sacco
green
1 sentence2024Decision of the Court than Brown’s counsel requested in his closing,” but adding that “ANW cannot point to anyplace in the record to support a claim that the jury award was the result of passion or prejudice or that it deviates materially from reasonable compensation.” In challenging that ruling on appeal, ANW relies on Soto v. Sacco, 242 Ariz. 474 (2017), arguing “[t]he trial court ignored the direction set forth in Soto.” ¶35 ANW concedes the verdict was not the result of passion or prejudice. | 1 | 2024–2024 |
State v. McDaniel
green
2 sentences1969The Court found nothing in the record to support defense counsel’s allegation that jurors had overheard prejudicial statements made by a newspaper man to defense counsel, and stated that “The rule is well settled in this jurisdiction that prejudice will not be pre *538 sumed, but must appear affirmatively from the record.” 80 Ariz. at 389 , 298 P.2d at 804 . 1969The Court found nothing in the record to support defense counsel’s allegation that jurors had overheard prejudicial statements made by a newspaper man to defense counsel, and stated that “The rule is well settled in this jurisdiction that prejudice will not be pre *538 sumed, but must appear affirmatively from the record.” 80 Ariz. at 389 , 298 P.2d at 804 . | 1 | 1969–1969 |
Dayton v. Palmer
green
2 sentences1966Accordingly, there being evidence in the record to support the instruction in question, Dayton v. Palmer, 1 Ariz.App. 184 , 400 P.2d 855 (1965), we find no error in the giving of the instruction simply because the complaint did not allege negligent maintenance of brakes. 1966Accordingly, there being evidence in the record to support the instruction in question, Dayton v. Palmer, 1 Ariz.App. 184 , 400 P.2d 855 (1965), we find no error in the giving of the instruction simply because the complaint did not allege negligent maintenance of brakes. | 1 | 1966–1966 |
Gray v. Woods
green
1 sentence1958“An unavoidable accident is one which Occurs while all persons concerned are exercising ordinary care, that is, one not caused by the fault of any of the persons; if the accident producing the injury could have been prevented by either person by means suggested by common prudence it is not deemed unavoidable.” Gray v. Woods, 84 Ariz. -, 324 P.2d 220, 224 . | 1 | 1958–1958 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.