Legal Opinion

State v. Gomez

Arizona Supreme Court

Decided February 8, 2006No. CR-05-0062-PRPublishedCited by 62 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

BALES, Justice.

VIA 1996 initiative measure known as Proposition 200 requires courts to place certain first- and second-time drug offenders on probation including appropriate drug treatment or education. Ariz.Rev.Stat. (“A.R.S.”) § 13-901.01 (2002). Mandatory probation, however, does not apply to any defendant “who has been convicted of or indicted for a violent crime,” and such persons may be imprisoned for their drug offenses. A.R.S. § 13-901.01(B).

V 2 The issue here is whether a ten-year-old, dismissed indictment disqualifies a defendant from mandatory probation under Proposition…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  2. Lewis v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  3. Dickerson v. New Banner Institute, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
  4. Hayes v. Continental InsuranceArizona Supreme Court · 1994
  5. State v. LindseyArizona Supreme Court · 1986

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

3Cited by62 opinions

  1. State v. HansenArizona Supreme Court · 2007
  2. Petersen v. Magna Corp.Michigan Supreme Court · 2009
  3. State v. McGillArizona Supreme Court · 2006
  4. Robert Baker v. University Physicians HealthcareArizona Supreme Court · 2013
  5. State of Arizona Ex Rel. Montgomery v. Hrach ShilgevorkyanArizona Supreme Court · 2014

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

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

Powered by the Exa API