Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2/23/2010

State v. Henry

Citations

228 P.3d 900
224 Ariz. 164
576 Ariz. Adv. Rep. 22
2010 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 failure to properly develop an argument results in waiver of that issue
noting that Arizona’s sex offender registration system is “regulatory despite its codification in title 13, A.R.S., our criminal code”
noting that the registration and notification exceptions that apply depending on the offender’s level of risk or age allow “the statutes to serve more precisely their nonpunitive ends”
noting that, between 1978 and 1983, Arizona was without a sex offender registration statute
acknowledging that federal precedent applies to questions raised under 13 both article I, § 10, clause 1 of the United States Constitution and article II, § 25 of the 14 Arizona Constitution
stating violations of the sex offender registration statutes do not constitute double jeopardy “given our conclusion that sex offender registration is a nonpunitive regulatory scheme”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Brammer, Eckerstrom, Garye, Vasquez, William

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

11 cases in this archive cite this case.

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.