State v. Welch
Cited by
- State v. Benitez Ariz. Ct. App. 2020
- State v. Lopez Ariz. Ct. App. 2020
- State v. Gray Ariz. Ct. App. 2019
- State v. Berliew Ariz. Ct. App. 2018
- State v. Smith Ariz. Ct. App. 2014
- State of Arizona v. William Peter Moran 307 P.3d 95 Ariz. Ct. App. 2013
- State of Arizona v. Guillermo C. Becerra 291 P.3d 994 Ariz. Ct. App. 2013
- State of Arizona v. Xavier Hipolito Estrella 286 P.3d 150 Ariz. Ct. App. 2012
- Susan Scheerer v. State of Arizona 281 P.3d 491 Ariz. Ct. App. 2012
- STATE OF ARIZONA v. STEVE FRANK McPHERSON 269 P.3d 1181 Ariz. Ct. App. 2012
- State of Arizona v. Luis Enrique Ortega Ariz. Ct. App. 2008
- State v. Price 183 P.3d 1279 Ariz. Ct. App. 2008
Authorities cited
Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.
- Fitzgerald v. Superior Court 845 P.2d 465
- State v. Cook 916 P.2d 1074
- State v. Hurley 4 P.3d 455
- State v. Duplain 425 P.2d 570
- State v. Cisneroz 947 P.2d 889
- State v. Rodriguez 7 P.3d 148
- State v. Woods 815 P.2d 912
- Quinton v. Superior Court 815 P.2d 914
- State v. Brown 986 P.2d 239
- State v. Chabolla-Hinojosa 965 P.2d 94
- State v. Foster 955 P.2d 993
- State v. Jones 916 P.2d 1119
- Hernandez v. Superior Court 880 P.2d 735
Opinion text
THOMPSON, Judge, concurring in part, dissenting in part. ¶ 16 I conclude that possession of equipment or chemicals is not a necessarily included offense of manufacture of a dangerous drug and therefore dissent from the majori-tjds holding to the contrary. I concur in the rest of the majority opinion. ¶ 17 An offense is a constituent part of a greater offense if the lesser offense is composed solely of some, but not all, of the elements of the greater. State v. Hurley, 197 Ariz. 400, 403 , 4 P.3d 455, 458 (App.2000) (citations omitted). The crime of possessing equipment or chemicals includes elements which are not present in the greater offense. These elements are “possession,” “equipment or chemicals,” and “purpose.” ¶ 18 To “possess” is to knowingly have physical possession or otherwise exercise dominion or control over property. A.R.S. § 13-105(30). There is no element of possession in the drug manufacturing offense. There is no element of the greater offense that requires the use of “equipment or chemicals.” Indeed, the statutory definition of “manufacture” includes the mere mixing of natural substances. A.R.S. § 13-3401(17). And section 13-3407(A)(3) requires an intentional mental state, as it prohibits the knowing possession of equipment or chemicals for the “purpose” of drug manufacture. “Purpose” means an “intended or desired result.” The Random House Dictionary of the English Language (2d ed.1987). The greater offense of drug manufacture merely requires the state of mind “knowingly.” A.R.S. § 13-3407(A)(4). ¶ 19 The majority holding is apparently based on the assertion that, considering the usual practices of drug manufacturers, one cannot make methamphetamine without using chemicals or equipment. But this premise does not reflect the comparison of statutory elements which is the proper inquiry here. I would affirm the three convictions challenged on appeal.