Legal Opinion
State v. Crisp
Court of Appeals of Arizona
Decided July 8, 1993No. 1 CA-CR 92-1069PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
TOCI, Judge.
The defendant appeals from the order of the superior court upholding the constitutionality of Phoenix city ordinance section 23-52(a)(2). The appeal challenges only the facial validity of the ordinance which states in part: “A person is guilty of a misdemeanor who ... [s]olicits or hires another person to commit an act of prostitution.”
Defendant was charged, by complaint, with soliciting an act of prostitution from an undercover police officer. After a jury trial in Phoenix City Court, defendant was convicted of violating section 23-52(a)(2). Defendant appealed to the…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Giboney v. Empire Storage & Ice Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1949
- Fuenning v. SUPER. CT. IN AND FOR CTY. OF MARICOPAArizona Supreme Court · 1983
- State v. BerryArizona Supreme Court · 1966
- State v. BatemanArizona Supreme Court · 1976
- In Re Pima County Juvenile Appeal No. 74802-2Arizona Supreme Court · 1990
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Files v. BernalCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2001
- City of Tempe v. Outdoor Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2001
- State v. McLambCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1996
- State v. SeyrafiCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2001
- Bird v. StateCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1995
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.