Court of Appeals of Arizona· 9/5/1996

State v. Dunlap

Citations

930 P.2d 518
187 Ariz. 441
224 Ariz. Adv. Rep. 50
1996 Ariz. App. LEXIS 190

How courts have described this case

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

holding that \probation is not confinement and does not extend the time for measuring the ten-year period\ of Arizona's Rule 609(b), which \source\ is \the federal rule\
holding that defendant was not entitled to an instruction when the specific contents of the documents removed from a file were unknown and there was no evidence they contained exculpatory information
holding that erroneous exclusion of cumulative evidence did not require reversal
finding loss of witnesses insufficient to establish prejudice without a showing their testimony would have impacted the verdict
noting that prejudice must be actual, substantial, and not speculative
finding similar instruction “made it clear that the trial court was not pressuring the jurors to sacrifice their convictions to reach a verdict”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Voss, Weisberg, Grant

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

103 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

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.