State v. Wall
In State v. Wall, 212 Ariz. 1,14, 126 P.3d 148, 150 (2006), decided the year before Speers's trial, our supreme court clarified that "evidence in the record can be sufficient to require a lesser-included offense instruction even when the defendant employs an all-or-nothing defense," although, "as a practical matter, when a defendant asserts an all-or-nothing defense such as alibi or mistaken identity, there will 'usually be little evidence on the record to support an instruction on the lesser included offenses.'" 212 Ariz. 1,29-30, 126 P.3d at 153,
The court further explained evidence is "sufficient to require a lesser-included offense instruction if two conditions are met.
The jury must be able to find that:
(a) the State failed to prove an element of the greater offense and;
(b) the evidence is sufficient to support a conviction on the lesser offense"; in other words, "the evidence must be such that a rational juror could conclude that the defendant committed only the lesser offense." Id.18.