Legal Opinion

State v. Estrada

Arizona Supreme Court

Decided November 15, 2001No. CR-00-0140-PR, CR-00-0306-PRPublishedCited by 75 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

JONES, Vice Chief Justice.

¶ 1 We granted review and consolidated these cases in order to resolve a conflict between Divisions One and Two of the court of appeals concerning the sentencing provisions of Proposition 200, an initiative measure adopted by the voters of Arizona in 1996. The question is whether the probation eligibility provisions of the statute should be applied not only to convictions for possession or use of drugs, but also to convictions for *249possession of drug paraphernalia. We have determined that Proposition 200 does apply to paraphernalia convictions where the…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Mail Boxes v. Industrial CommissionArizona Supreme Court · 1995
  2. Canon School District No. 50 v. W.E.S. Construction Co.Arizona Supreme Court · 1994
  3. State Ex Rel. Corbin v. PickrellArizona Supreme Court · 1983
  4. Jett v. City of TucsonArizona Supreme Court · 1994
  5. Calik v. KongableArizona Supreme Court · 1999

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

3Cited by75 opinions

  1. State v. GomezArizona Supreme Court · 2006
  2. State v. ThuesCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2002
  3. United States v. Alejandro Robles-RodriguezCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
  4. State of Arizona Ex Rel. Montgomery v. Hrach ShilgevorkyanArizona Supreme Court · 2014
  5. Evans Withycombe, Inc. v. Western Innovations, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2006

70 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