State of Arizona v. Angelino Paolo Buccheri-Bianca

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that \no rule is better established than that the credibility of the witnesses and the weight and value to be given to their testimony are questions exclusively for the jury\ (cleaned up)
• explaining that 5 The jury was properly instructed on accomplice liability. 5 STATE v. ORTIZ Decision of the Court inconsistencies in evidence are “matters for the jury’s consideration in making its credibility determinations and weighing the evidence”
• finding that amendment changing the location of the crime was not prejudicial because location was not element of the offense, and defendant was permitted to point out amendment to jury and argue that it demonstrated major change in victim’s story
• “It is not the province of an appellate court to reweigh evidence or reassess the witnesses’ credibility.”
• “It is not the province of an appellate court to reweigh evidence or reassess the witnesses’ credibility.”
• “[N]o rule is better established than that the credibility of the witnesses and the weight and value to be given to their testimony are questions exclusively for the jury.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).