State of Arizona v. Anthony Duran
Arizona Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
Justice PELANDER,
opinion of the Court.
¶ 1 After rejecting a proposed plea agreement, the trial court erroneously ruled that the State could impeach defendant Anthony Duran with statements he made in connection with his change of plea if he testified inconsistently with them at trial. Duran objected to this ruling and asserts it caused him to choose not to testify. We hold that Duran cannot raise the trial court’s error on appeal because a defendant must testify to preserve a challenge to a ruling permitting the use of evidence for impeachment.
I
¶ 2 The State charged Duran with four felonies…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Mincey v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Luce v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- McGautha v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Ohler v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- New Jersey v. PortashSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- State of Arizona v. Bryan Peter FoshayCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2016
- Holm v. GatewayCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2018
- State v. BuckleyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2014
- State v. CookCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2017
- State v. GarciaCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2020