State of Arizona v. Darren Lee Winegardner
Arizona Supreme Court
CHIEF JUSTICE BALES authored the opinion of the Court, in which VICE CHIEF JUSTICE BRUTINEL and JUSTICES PELANDER and TIMMER joined. JUSTICE LOPEZ, joined by JUSTICES BOLICK and GOULD, dissented in part and concurred in the result.
1Opinion of the Court
CHIEF JUSTICE BALES, opinion of the Court:
¶ 1 Arizona Rule of Evidence 609(a)(2) provides that when a party seeks to attack "a witness's character for truthfulness by evidence of a criminal conviction ..., the evidence must be admitted if the court can readily determine that establishing the elements of the crime required proving-or the witness's admitting-a dishonest act or false statement." We hold that a conviction for shoplifting, as codified in A.R.S. § 13-1805(A), is not automatically admissible under Rule 609(a)(2) because the crime does not necessarily require the prosecution to prove…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Morissette v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
- State v. BibleArizona Supreme Court · 1993
- Sekhar v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2013
- United States v. Leroy HayesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1977
- United States v. Tyrone Smith, United States of America v. Anthony E. GartrellCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1976
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- State v. MorrisCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2019
- State v. ToddCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2018
- State v. DuarteCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2018
- Saban Rent-A-Car LLC v. Ariz. Dep't of RevenueArizona Supreme Court · 2019
- State v. RoseCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2019