State v. Musser

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that, subject to First Amendment exceptions, “a person to whom a statute may constitutionally be applied does not have standing to challenge that statute simply because it conceivably could be applied unconstitutionally in other cases”
• overbreadth attack on statute could be dealt with on as applied basis if State sought to expand statute to protected conduct
• “Traditionally, a person to whom a statute may constitutionally be applied does not have standing to challenge that statute simply because it conceivably could be applied unconstitutionally in other cases.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

8 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Martin v. Reinstein
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1999-05-13· cited 153×
• State v. Casey
  Arizona Supreme Court· 2003-06-25· cited 48×
• State v. Kaiser
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2003-04-01· cited 29×
• State v. Brown
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2004-02-17· cited 24×
• State v. Coulter
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2014-12-11· cited 15×
• State v. Mutschler
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2003-04-01· cited 7×
• State of Arizona v. Stephen Douglas Reeves
  Arizona Supreme Court· 2013-10-23· cited 2×
• State of Arizona v. Lawrence Brown, Jr.
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2004-02-17

Cites

6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Broadrick v. Oklahoma
  Supreme Court· 1973-06-25· cited 4,338×
• New York v. Ferber
  Supreme Court· 1982-07-02· cited 2,505×
• Members of the City Council of Los Angeles v. Taxpayers for Vincent
  Supreme Court· 1984-05-15· cited 2,188×
• Village of Schaumburg v. Citizens for a Better Environment
  Supreme Court· 1980-04-14· cited 909×
• State v. Bly
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1980-11-18· cited 107×
• State v. Steiger
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1989-09-21· cited 38×