Legal Opinion
State v. Tober
Arizona Supreme Court
Decided November 3, 1992No. CR-91-0375-PRPublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
MARTONE, Justice.
We are asked to decide whether A.R.S. § 44-1841, prohibiting the sale of unregistered securities, and A.R.S. § 44-1842, prohibiting transactions in securities by unregistered dealers and sellers, are vague under the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. We hold that they are not.
PROCEEDINGS
Tober and Black were indicted for the sale of unregistered securities under A.R.S. § 44-1841 and transactions in securities by unregistered dealers and sellers under A.R.S. § 44-1842. Arguing that courts are hopelessly divided over when a note is a security, they moved to…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Reves v. Ernst & YoungSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- In Re Pima County Juvenile Appeal No. 74802-2Arizona Supreme Court · 1990
- Securities and Exchange Commission v. R.G. Reynolds Enterprises, Inc. Richard ReynoldsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1991
- State v. ToberCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1992
3Cited by8 opinions
- State v. McLambCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1996
- MacCollum v. PerkinsonCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1996
- State v. RamosNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1993
- State v. FriendNevada Supreme Court · 2002
- Carey v. K&MCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2014
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.