Legal Opinion

State Ex Rel. Purcell v. Superior Court

Arizona Supreme Court

Decided May 29, 1975No. 12070PublishedCited by 25 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HOLOHAN, Justice.

The Respondent Real Party in Interest, Albert Lynn Naylor, was charged with violation of A.R.S. § 13-712(9), as amended in 1970, commonly referred to as “trespass by loitering.” He was found guilty in the Municipal Court of the City of Phoenix, from which judgment and sentence he appealed to the superior court for a trial de novo.

Prior to trial in the superior court, the Respondent Naylor filed a motion to dismiss the prosecution on the grounds that the statute under which he was charged was unconstitutional. The superior court granted the motion and dismissed the prosecution.

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Thornhill v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
  2. United States v. HarrissSupreme Court of the United States · 1954
  3. Papachristou v. City of JacksonvilleSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  4. Herndon v. LowrySupreme Court of the United States · 1937
  5. State v. StarksWisconsin Supreme Court · 1971

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

3Cited by25 opinions

  1. Martin v. ReinsteinCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1999
  2. State v. BanksSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1978
  3. Ruiz v. HullArizona Supreme Court · 1998
  4. In Re Pima County Juvenile Appeal No. 74802-2Arizona Supreme Court · 1990
  5. State v. ThompsonCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1983

20 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