clear and manifest error in Arizona

15 Arizona opinions name it 2 courts 1966–2018 0 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.

Followed or applied (5)

Case	Followed	Cited
State v. Lambgreen ariz · 1977 · cited in 2 Arizona opinions naming this issue, 1978–1978 2 sentences 1978We have stated: “Whether there has been an accurate in-court identification of the defendant, not 335 tainted by prior identification procedures and whether such procedures are fair, are preliminary questions for the trial court, (citation omitted), and the trial court’s determination will not be overturned on appeal absent a clear and manifest error, (citations omitted)” State v. Lamb, 116 Ariz. 134, 139 , 568 P.2d 1032, 1037 (1977). 1978We have stated: “Whether there has been an accurate in-court identification of the defendant, not 335 tainted by prior identification procedures and whether such procedures are fair, are preliminary questions for the trial court, (citation omitted), and the trial court’s determination will not be overturned on appeal absent a clear and manifest error, (citations omitted)” State v. Lamb, 116 Ariz. 134, 139 , 568 P.2d 1032, 1037 (1977).	1	2
State v. Petersongreen arizctapp · 2011 · cited in 1 Arizona opinions naming this issue, 2018–2018 1 sentence 2018Peterson, 228 Ariz. at 407, ¶ 6 . 3 STATE v. SCHAEFFER Decision of the Court ¶11 Schaeffer argues that statements he made to the detective during two interviews held two weeks apart in the month of June 2013 were involuntary, and should have been suppressed.	1	1
State v. Dugangreen ariz · 1976 · cited in 1 Arizona opinions naming this issue, 1985–1985 2 sentences 1985State v. Dugan, 113 Ariz. 354, 356 , 555 P.2d 108, 110 (1976). 1985State v. Dugan, 113 Ariz. 354, 356 , 555 P.2d 108, 110 (1976).	1	1
State v. Georgegreen ariz · 1971 · cited in 1 Arizona opinions naming this issue, 1972–1972 2 sentences 1972Both Kasai and Battleson testified that one of the robbers warned the two victims that if they did not cooperate, “I will shoot.” The state apparently acknowledges on appeal that the prosecution made no showing at trial to prove that the gun(s) assertedly used by the robbers was (were) loaded at the time of the robbery. “ * * * [0]ne of the essential elements [of a robbery as defined in A.R.S. § 13-641] is the use of force or the putting in fear — in this case, the pointing of the pistol at the robbery victim.” State v. George, 108 Ariz. 5, at 7 , 491 P.2d 838, at 840 (1971). 1972Both Kasai and Battleson testified that one of the robbers warned the two victims that if they did not cooperate, “I will shoot.” The state apparently acknowledges on appeal that the prosecution made no showing at trial to prove that the gun(s) assertedly used by the robbers was (were) loaded at the time of the robbery. “ * * * [0]ne of the essential elements [of a robbery as defined in A.R.S. § 13-641] is the use of force or the putting in fear — in this case, the pointing of the pistol at the robbery victim.” State v. George, 108 Ariz. 5, at 7 , 491 P.2d 838, at 840 (1971).	1	1
State v. Sandersgreen ariz · 1966 · cited in 1 Arizona opinions naming this issue, 1969–1969 2 sentences 1969His determination that a confession is voluntary will not be disturbed on appeal unless there is a clear and manifest error.” State v. Sanders, 101 Ariz. 410, 412 , 420 P.2d 281, 283 (1966). 1969His determination that a confession is voluntary will not be disturbed on appeal unless there is a clear and manifest error.” State v. Sanders, 101 Ariz. 410, 412 , 420 P.2d 281, 283 (1966).	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Arizona. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (14)

Case	Cited	Years
State v. Milonich neutral ariz · 1975 2 sentences 1977State v. Milonich, 111 Ariz. 442 , 532 P.2d 504 (1975); State v. Williams, 111 Ariz. 175 , 526 P.2d 714 (1974). 1977State v. Milonich, 111 Ariz. 442 , 532 P.2d 504 (1975); State v. Williams, 111 Ariz. 175 , 526 P.2d 714 (1974).	4	1975–1977
State v. Williams green ariz · 1974 2 sentences 1977State v. Milonich, 111 Ariz. 442 , 532 P.2d 504 (1975); State v. Williams, 111 Ariz. 175 , 526 P.2d 714 (1974). 1977State v. Milonich, 111 Ariz. 442 , 532 P.2d 504 (1975); State v. Williams, 111 Ariz. 175 , 526 P.2d 714 (1974).	4	1975–1977
State v. Dessureault green ariz · 1969 2 sentences 1977State v. Dessureault, 104 Ariz. 380 , 453 P.2d 951 (1969), cert. den. 397 U.S. 965 , 90 S.Ct. 1000 , 25 L.Ed.2d 257 (1970), and the trial court’s determination will not be overturned on appeal absent a clear and manifest error. 1977State v. Dessureault, 104 Ariz. 380 , 453 P.2d 951 (1969), cert. den. 397 U.S. 965 , 90 S.Ct. 1000 , 25 L.Ed.2d 257 (1970), and the trial court’s determination will not be overturned on appeal absent a clear and manifest error.	2	1976–1977
State v. Pulliam green ariz · 1960 2 sentences 1976State v. Edwards, 111 Ariz. 357 , 529 P.2d 1174 (1974), State v. Pulliam, 87 Ariz. 216 , 349 P.2d 781 (1960). 1976State v. Edwards, 111 Ariz. 357 , 529 P.2d 1174 (1974), State v. Pulliam, 87 Ariz. 216 , 349 P.2d 781 (1960).	2	1966–1976
State v. Graham green ariz · 1983 2 sentences 1986State v. Graham, 135 Ariz. 209 , 660 P.2d 460 (1983). 1986State v. Graham, 135 Ariz. 209 , 660 P.2d 460 (1983).	1	1986–1986
State v. Walker green ariz · 1978 2 sentences 1985In the absence of a clear and manifest error, we will not interfere with a trial judge’s denial of a motion to suppress, State v. Walker, 119 Ariz. 121 , 579 P.2d 1091 (1978); State v. Dupuy, 116 Ariz. 151 , 568 P.2d 1049 (1977), and will affirm the trial court’s correct decision even if it was reached for the wrong reason. 1985In the absence of a clear and manifest error, we will not interfere with a trial judge’s denial of a motion to suppress, State v. Walker, 119 Ariz. 121 , 579 P.2d 1091 (1978); State v. Dupuy, 116 Ariz. 151 , 568 P.2d 1049 (1977), and will affirm the trial court’s correct decision even if it was reached for the wrong reason.	1	1985–1985
State v. Dupuy green ariz · 1977 2 sentences 1985In the absence of a clear and manifest error, we will not interfere with a trial judge’s denial of a motion to suppress, State v. Walker, 119 Ariz. 121 , 579 P.2d 1091 (1978); State v. Dupuy, 116 Ariz. 151 , 568 P.2d 1049 (1977), and will affirm the trial court’s correct decision even if it was reached for the wrong reason. 1985In the absence of a clear and manifest error, we will not interfere with a trial judge’s denial of a motion to suppress, State v. Walker, 119 Ariz. 121 , 579 P.2d 1091 (1978); State v. Dupuy, 116 Ariz. 151 , 568 P.2d 1049 (1977), and will affirm the trial court’s correct decision even if it was reached for the wrong reason.	1	1985–1985
State v. Darby green ariz · 1969 2 sentences 1977State v. Darby, 105 Ariz. 115 , 460 P.2d 9 (1969). 1977State v. Darby, 105 Ariz. 115 , 460 P.2d 9 (1969).	1	1977–1977
Dessureault v. Arizona green scotus · 1970 1 sentence 1977State v. Dessureault, 104 Ariz. 380 , 453 P.2d 951 (1969), cert. den. 397 U.S. 965 , 90 S.Ct. 1000 , 25 L.Ed.2d 257 (1970), and the trial court’s determination will not be overturned on appeal absent a clear and manifest error.	1	1977–1977
Taylor v. Arizona green scotus · 1976 2 sentences 1977State v. Taylor, 112 Ariz. 68 , 537 P.2d 938 (1975), cert. den. 424 U.S. 921 , 96 S.Ct. 1127 , 47 L.Ed.2d 328 (1976). 1977State v. Taylor, 112 Ariz. 68 , 537 P.2d 938 (1975), cert. den. 424 U.S. 921 , 96 S.Ct. 1127 , 47 L.Ed.2d 328 (1976).	1	1977–1977
State v. Taylor green ariz · 1975 2 sentences 1977State v. Taylor, 112 Ariz. 68 , 537 P.2d 938 (1975), cert. den. 424 U.S. 921 , 96 S.Ct. 1127 , 47 L.Ed.2d 328 (1976). 1977State v. Taylor, 112 Ariz. 68 , 537 P.2d 938 (1975), cert. den. 424 U.S. 921 , 96 S.Ct. 1127 , 47 L.Ed.2d 328 (1976).	1	1977–1977
State v. Edwards green ariz · 1974 2 sentences 1976State v. Edwards, 111 Ariz. 357 , 529 P.2d 1174 (1974), State v. Pulliam, 87 Ariz. 216 , 349 P.2d 781 (1960). 1976State v. Edwards, 111 Ariz. 357 , 529 P.2d 1174 (1974), State v. Pulliam, 87 Ariz. 216 , 349 P.2d 781 (1960).	1	1976–1976
State v. Pina red ariz · 1963 2 sentences 1966State v. Pulliam, 87 Ariz. 216 , 349 P.2d 781 (1960); State v. Thomas, 78 Ariz. 52 , 275 P.2d 408 (1954), overruled on other grounds, State v. Pina, 94 Ariz. 243 , 383 P.2d 167 . 1966State v. Pulliam, 87 Ariz. 216 , 349 P.2d 781 (1960); State v. Thomas, 78 Ariz. 52 , 275 P.2d 408 (1954), overruled on other grounds, State v. Pina, 94 Ariz. 243 , 383 P.2d 167 .	1	1966–1966
State v. Thomas green ariz · 1954 2 sentences 1966State v. Pulliam, 87 Ariz. 216 , 349 P.2d 781 (1960); State v. Thomas, 78 Ariz. 52 , 275 P.2d 408 (1954), overruled on other grounds, State v. Pina, 94 Ariz. 243 , 383 P.2d 167 . 1966State v. Pulliam, 87 Ariz. 216 , 349 P.2d 781 (1960); State v. Thomas, 78 Ariz. 52 , 275 P.2d 408 (1954), overruled on other grounds, State v. Pina, 94 Ariz. 243 , 383 P.2d 167 .	1	1966–1966

Where else courts name it

PA 35 (2018–2026) AZ 15 (1966–2018) LA 3 (1970–2003)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check

Your account

Appearance

Create a free account

You’re in.

clear and manifest error in Arizona

Followed or applied (5)

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Also cited on this issue (14)

Where else courts name it