State v. Riley

How courts have described this case

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

• noting “possession” may be either actual, meaning physical custody of the item, or constructive, meaning dominion and control of the item
• “Circumstantial evidence is the proof of the existence of some fact from which fact the existence of the thing in issue may be legally and logically inferred.”
• “Circumstantial evidence is the proof of the existence of some fact from which fact the inferred.”
• “Circumstantial evidence is the proof of the existence of some fact from which fact the existence of the thing in issue may be legally and logically inferred.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

7 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Dawson v. Withycombe
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2007-07-24· cited 158×
• State v. Ballinger
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1973-01-09· cited 26×
• Phillips v. State
  Indiana Court of Appeals· 1974-06-28· cited 24×
• State v. Curtis
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1977-03-22· cited 15×
• State v. Hays
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1972-05-02· cited 7×
• State v. Barreras
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1975-11-26· cited 5×
• Dawson v. Withycombe
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2007-06-05