State v. Rodriguez - Arizona Judicial Branch
State v. Rodriguez - Arizona Judicial Branch
State v. Rodriguez - Arizona Judicial Branch
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
instruction requested by the defense. Instead, the test is whether<br />
the instructions adequately set forth the law applicable to the<br />
case. <strong>State</strong> v. Axley, 132 Ariz. 383, 392, 646 P.2d 268, 277<br />
(1982). We view jury instructions in their entirety when<br />
determining whether they adequately reflect the law. <strong>State</strong> v.<br />
Gallegos, 178 Ariz. 1, 10, 870 P.2d 1097, 1106 (1994).<br />
17 In deciding whether defendant was entitled to an alibi<br />
instruction, we first consider the sufficiency of the evidence to<br />
support an alibi defense. Evidence tending to show that the<br />
defendant had no opportunity to commit the crime because he was at<br />
another place when the crime occurred raises the alibi defense.<br />
<strong>State</strong> v. Berry, 101 Ariz. 310, 313, 419 P.2d 337, 340 (1966);<br />
Azbill v. <strong>State</strong>, 19 Ariz. 499, 501, 172 P. 658, 659 (1918). To<br />
decide whether the record reasonably supports an alibi defense, we<br />
consider evidence tending to establish when the crime occurred and<br />
evidence showing defendant’s whereabouts during that time.<br />
18 With respect to the time of the killing, the state<br />
established the time of death within a several-day range. Other<br />
evidence, if believed, tended to narrow the time to within a few<br />
hours. The state’s forensic pathologist testified that the killing<br />
probably occurred sometime early in the period between 6 p.m. on<br />
Tuesday, August 23 and 6 p.m. on Thursday, August 25. A friend<br />
testified that he saw the victim alive late in the evening of<br />
August 24. A neighbor heard the victim’s voice, arguing with an<br />
8