Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Steinle

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided July 23, 2015No. 1 CA-SA 14-0214Published

1DissentHowe, J.

¶ 18 I respectfully dissent from the majority’s holding that the trial court properly excluded the video under Arizona Rule of Evidence 106. Although Rule 106 properly applies to conduct, see, e.g., United States v. Spearman, 186 F.3d 743, 755 (6th Cir.1999) (applying the rule to a video demonstrating conduct); DesJardins v. State, 759 N.E.2d 1036, 1037 (Ind.2001) (same); Bunch v. State, 123 So.3d 484, 493-94 (Miss.2013) (same), the majority misapplies Rule 106 to *535preclude a complete statement that is otherwise admissible. Given the explosive growth of social networking and the constant…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Marktray Spearman v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1999
  2. State v. MacUmberArizona Supreme Court · 1978
  3. State v. PrasertphongArizona Supreme Court · 2005
  4. United States v. YevakporDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 2006
  5. State v. ChavezCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2010

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API