Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2/17/2004

State v. Brown

Citations

85 P.3d 109
207 Ariz. 231
419 Ariz. Adv. Rep. 15
2004 Ariz. App. LEXIS 26

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

holding that statutes containing a specific intent requirement while prohibiting certain types of communication do not implicate the First Amendment because they prohibit harassment, not speech
holding that defendant lacked standing to raise constitutional challenge to harassment statute, the court found “the narrow exception to the standing requirement inapplicable” because the statute “‘regulates conduct as well as speech’” (quotation omitted)
holding harassment statute constitutional because it “regulates neither constitutionally protected speech nor expressive conduct”
A.R.S § 13-2921 “does not apply to pure First Amendment speech and instead regulates, at most, a blend of speech and conduct”
repeated phone calls to victim by disappointed suitor after court had entered a no contact order
both relying on the statutory requirement of a specific intent to harass

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Pelander, Espinosa, Eckerstrom

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

17 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

45 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.