Court of Appeals of Arizona· 7/10/2001

State v. Garcia

Citations

28 P.3d 327
200 Ariz. 471
351 Ariz. Adv. Rep. 10
2001 Ariz. App. LEXIS 104

How courts have described this case

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

holding that reversal is not warranted if court can say beyond a reasonable doubt that omitted jury instruction did not contribute to verdict, and affirming because undisputed evidence proved missing element
noting that “the potential for unfairness [was] particularly high” in a case where “many very young victims . . . each testif[ied] to multiple uncharged molestations,” and where the trial judge admitted the uncharged acts as proof of the defendant’s character
noting that “the potential for unfairness [was] particularly high” in a case where “many very young victims . . . each testif[ied] to multiple uncharged molestations,” and where the trial judge admitted the uncharged acts as proof of the defendant’s character
\[t]he trial court . . . did not undertake a 403 analysis. . . .\
“[A] defendant’s aberrant sexual propensity might be proved by admitting evidence of similar acts committed near in time to the offense charged.”
“[t]he trial court ... did not undertake a 403 analysis ____”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Fidel, Toci, Sult

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

15 cases in this archive cite 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.