Court of Appeals of Arizona· 8/3/2010

State v. Martin

Citations

235 P.3d 1045
225 Ariz. 162
588 Ariz. Adv. Rep. 24
2010 Ariz. App. LEXIS 122

How courts have described this case

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

applying this standard in finding that even if it was fundamental error to admit videotape in evidence, it did not prejudice the defendant
“To warrant reversal under fundamental error review . . . [d]efendant must show prejudice; that is, he must show that absent error, a reasonable jury could have reached a different result.”
“Speculative prejudice is insufficient under fundamental error review.”
“Speculative prejudice is insufficient under fundamental error review.”
“Speculative prejudice is insufficient under fundamental error review.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Orozco, Johnsen, Thompson

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

24 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.