Legal Opinion
State v. Weinstein
Court of Appeals of Arizona
Decided June 20, 1995No. 1 CA-CR 94-0093PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
GERBER, Presiding Judge.
The state appeals the trial court’s dismissal of a theft by extortion charge against defendant Eric Haywood Weinstein (Weinstein). We conclude that Arizona Revised Statutes Annotated (A.R.S.) section 13-1804(A)(6), under which Weinstein was indicted, is unconstitutionally overbroad because it encompasses a substantial amount of protected speech. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court’s ruling.
BACKGROUND
Weinstein was indicted on charges of first-degree computer fraud, a class 3 felony, in violation of A.R.S. section 13-2316(A), and theft by extortion, a class 4…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Broadrick v. OklahomaSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Kolender v. LawsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Chaplinsky v. New HampshireSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Doran v. Salem Inn, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1975
- National Ass'n for the Advancement of Colored People v. Claiborne Hardware Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- State v. McLambCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1996
- Nordstrom, Inc. v. Maricopa CountyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2004
- State v. OchoaCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1997
- State v. GillCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2014
- United States v. JacksonDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1997
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.