Legal Opinion

State v. Brockell

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided February 29, 1996No. 2 CA-CR 94-0437PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

DRUKE, Chief Judge.

The state appeals from the trial court’s dismissal of the indictment charging appellee with causing criminal damage in an amount more than $2,000 but less than $10,000, a class five felony, A.R.S. § 13-1602(A) and (B)(2), based on its finding that the statute is unconstitutionally vague. We reverse for the reasons stated below.1

A statute is void for vagueness if it fails to define a criminal offense with enough particularity so as to inform an ordinary person of the proscribed conduct or if it encourages arbitrary enforcement. State v. Martin, 174 Ariz. 118, 847 P.2d…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Grayned v. City of RockfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  2. Grayned v. City of RockfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  3. Fuenning v. SUPER. CT. IN AND FOR CTY. OF MARICOPAArizona Supreme Court · 1983
  4. Fuenning v. Superior CourtArizona Supreme Court · 1983
  5. Thatcher v. Lane Construction Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1970

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. In Re Kalib A.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2018
  2. State of Arizona v. Jesus Ismael RodriguezCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2025

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

Powered by the Exa API