Arizona Supreme Court· 3/26/1985

State v. Burton

Citations

697 P.2d 331
144 Ariz. 248
1985 Ariz. LEXIS 183

How courts have described this case

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

“Fingerprints are direct evidence and their presence alone can be sufficient to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.”
“[W]here a motion in limine is made and ruled upon, the objection raised in that motion is preserved for appeal, despite the absence of a specific objection at trial.”
“[W]here a motion in limine is made and ruled upon, the objection raised in that motion is preserved for appeal, despite the absence of a specific objection at trial.”
“where a motion in limine is made and ruled upon, the objection raised in that motion is preserved for appeal, despite the absence of a specific objection at trial”
fundamental error goes to foundation of case or takes from defendant a right essential to his defense.
defendant’s fingerprints on pack of gum left by robber on store counter

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Hays, Feldman, Holohan, Gordon, Cameron

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

27 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

13 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.