Legal Opinion

State v. Padilla

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided May 2, 1991No. 1 CA-CR 89-759PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

EHRLICH, Judge.

Manuel Ignacio Padilla appeals from his conviction for knowingly offering to sell cocaine, and from the sentence imposed. Padilla contends that his conviction cannot stand because his conduct, which consisted solely of speech, is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article 2, Section 6 of the Arizona Constitution. He also claims that the sentence imposed is unconstitutional, arguing that because an offer to sell cocaine is punished to the same extent as an actual sale of cocaine, the sentence is disproportionate to the crime in…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Solem v. HelmSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. Schenck v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1919
  3. Giboney v. Empire Storage & Ice Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1949
  4. Schecter v. KillingsworthArizona Supreme Court · 1963
  5. United States v. Gary BarnettCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. State v. AlvaradoCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1994
  2. State v. KlausnerCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1998
  3. State v. CrispCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1993
  4. State v. WeinsteinCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1995
  5. State v. McCoyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1996

7 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