State v. Sarullo

How courts have described this case

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

• rejecting argument “that the only victim of a burglary is the person against whom the theft or felony was intended to be committed”
• affirming the superior court’s denial of the defendant’s request for the victim’s privileged records because “nothing in the record” supported the defendant’s assertion that the victim’s mental health issues caused her to fabricate the assault
• a crime victim was not required to produce medical records protected by the Victims’ Bill of Rights without a showing the records contained exculpatory evidence
• prosecutor did not shift the burden of proof by arguing defendant had failed to call expert witnesses 4 The court gave the standard jury instruction defining possession. See Rev. Ariz. Jury Instr. (\RAJI\
• argument regarding a defendant’s failure to call expert witnesses is proper
• acceptable to comment on defendant's lack of evidence

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).