Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State of Arizona v. Justin James Chase, 304 P.3d 1088.

26 citing documents.

Terry v. UPS Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Terry v. UPS Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
of Pima, ¶ 15 (App. 2013).
State v. Valentin Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
State v. Valentin Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
of Pima, ¶ 15 (App. 2013).
State v. Jones 424 P.3d 447 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
State v. Jones 424 P.3d 447 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
of Pima, ¶¶ 14-15 (App. 2013) (citing Fid.
Christopher H., Arxit B. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Christopher H., Arxit B. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
¶ 13 (App. 2013) (presumption that marijuana use is privileged medical use only applies to valid cardholders); see also A.R.S.
State v. Young Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Young Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
¶10 Young argues the trial court erred by failing to have the jury determine whether a sale occurred, under a preponderance of the evidence standard, before the court evaluated whether statutory immunity applied and submitted the charges to the jury.
Gersten v. Sun Pain Management, P.L.L.C. 395 P.3d 310 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Gersten v. Sun Pain Management, P.L.L.C. 395 P.3d 310 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
of Pima, ¶¶ 14-15 , (“In claiming protection under this statutory immunity, it is a [qualifying patient’s] burden to ‘plead and prove,’ by a preponderance of the evidence, that his or her actions fall within the range of immune action.”) (citation omitted).
State v. Alter Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State v. Alter Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
State of Arizona v. Liwski 358 P.3d 605 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2015
State of Arizona v. Liwski 358 P.3d 605 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2015
State v. Cheatham 353 P.3d 382 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State v. Cheatham 353 P.3d 382 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
State of Arizona v. Ronald James Sisco II 359 P.3d 1 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2015
State of Arizona v. Ronald James Sisco II 359 P.3d 1 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2015
State of Arizona v. Jeremy Allen Matlock 350 P.3d 835 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2015
State of Arizona v. Jeremy Allen Matlock 350 P.3d 835 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2015
¶9 this court explained that registered qualifying patients under the AMMA “may be prosecuted for marijuana-related offenses” if they improperly transfer marijuana under § 36-2811(B).
State of Arizona v. Lee L.N. 340 P.3d 1085 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
State of Arizona v. Lee L.N. 340 P.3d 1085 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
Keenan Reed-Kaliher v. State of Arizona 332 P.3d 587 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
Keenan Reed-Kaliher v. State of Arizona 332 P.3d 587 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
-87 , -01 (App.1993); see also Ariz. R.P.