Legal Opinion
City of Tucson v. Rineer
Court of Appeals of Arizona
Decided August 27, 1998No. 2CA-CR97-0407PublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ESPINOSA, Judge.
¶ 1 After entering Himmel Park with a handgun, appellant Kenneth Rineer was cited for violating Tucson City Code § 21-3(5)(2), which prohibits using or possessing firearms within Tucson city parks. Rineer moved to dismiss the complaint, arguing the ordinance is preempted by A.R.S. §§ 13-3102, 13-3107, and 13-3108(A) and violates his constitutional right to bear arms under article II, § 26 of the Arizona Constitution. The city court granted Rineer’s motion, finding the ordinance “unconstitutional in that the state has preempted the control of firearms within the state.”…
2Cases cited43 opinions
- Campbell v. Superior CourtArizona Supreme Court · 1971
- Kalodimos v. Village of Morton GroveIllinois Supreme Court · 1984
- Galvan v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1969
- Jett v. City of TucsonArizona Supreme Court · 1994
- State v. ReidSupreme Court of Alabama · 1840
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Dillon v. Zeneca Corp.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2002
- McMann v. City of TucsonCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2002
- City of Tucson v. GrezaffiCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2001
- City of Tucson v. Consumers for Retail ChoiceCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2000
- City of Tucson v. Pima CountyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2001
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.