State v. Hon. hancock/jennifer Ferrell
Arizona Supreme Court
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
- Boykin v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Ricketts v. AdamsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- State v. Gonzalez-GutierrezArizona Supreme Court · 1996
- State v. EthingtonArizona Supreme Court · 1979
- Keenan Reed-Kaliher v. Hon. hoggat/stateArizona Supreme Court · 2015
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Keenan Reed-Kaliher v. Hon. hoggat/stateArizona Supreme Court · 2015
- State of Arizona v. Demitres RobertsonArizona Supreme Court · 2020
- State of Arizona v. Bryan Mitchell LietzauArizona Supreme Court · 2020
- State of Arizona v. Ronald James Sisco IICourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2015
- State v. CheathamCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2015
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.