Rocha v. State, Public Utilities Commission

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the trial court may not substitute its judgment for that of the board with respect to the imposition of a sanction when competent evidence supports the factual findings of the board
• instructing that the standard of review is so deferential that a court should not reverse an agency's decision merely because it would have reached a different result
• explaining that where evidence gives rise to multiple reasonable inferences, the Superior Court may not substitute its preferred inference for the agency's unless the agency's chosen inference is \completely bereft of any competent evidentiary support\
• reviewing an agency's decision and sanctions to find whether the agency's decision was supported by any competent evidence
• court \must uphold the agency's conclusions when they are supported by any legally competent evidence in the record\
• \[T]he Superior Court was not permitted to decide whether the division chose the appropriate sanction but instead to determine whether the division's finding . . . was supported by any competent record evidence.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).