Legal Opinion

State v. Hon. hancock/jennifer Ferrell

Arizona Supreme Court

Decided April 7, 2015No. CV-14-0084-PRPublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Justice TIMMER,

opinion of the Court:

¶ 1 Under the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act (“AMMA”), A.R.S. §§ 36-2801 to -2819, a registered qualifying patient cannot be “arrest[ed], prosecut[ed] or penalized] in any manner” or denied “any right or privilege” for authorized medical marijuana possession and use. A.R.S. § 36-2811(B). We must decide whether this provision prohibits a trial court from forbidding AMMA-compliant mar ijuana use as a condition of probation. If the condition is prohibited, we must also decide whether the state can withdraw from a plea agreement after the trial court rejects a…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Boykin v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  2. Ricketts v. AdamsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  3. State v. Gonzalez-GutierrezArizona Supreme Court · 1996
  4. State v. EthingtonArizona Supreme Court · 1979
  5. Keenan Reed-Kaliher v. Hon. hoggat/stateArizona Supreme Court · 2015

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Keenan Reed-Kaliher v. Hon. hoggat/stateArizona Supreme Court · 2015
  2. State of Arizona v. Demitres RobertsonArizona Supreme Court · 2020
  3. State of Arizona v. Bryan Mitchell LietzauArizona Supreme Court · 2020
  4. State of Arizona v. Ronald James Sisco IICourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2015
  5. State v. CheathamCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2015

3 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