Arizona Revised Statutes
Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 36-2512 (2026)
Substances in schedule I; rules
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
AZ-LEGazleg.gov (official)
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
A. The board shall adopt by rule the schedule I controlled substances listed in 21 Code of Federal Regulations section 1308.11 and section 13-3401 and shall amend the rules, as necessary, to reflect any changes in the schedule I controlled substance designations.
B. The board may except by rule any compound, mixture or preparation containing any substance adopted by rule pursuant to this section from the application of all or any part of this chapter if the compound, mixture or preparation contains one or more active medicinal ingredients and if the admixtures are included therein in combinations, quantity, proportion or concentration that vitiates the potential for abuse.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1985–2022 · leading case: State v. Dungan, 718 P.2d 1010 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1985).
State v. Dungan, 718 P.2d 1010 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1985). “He contends that §§ 36-2512 and 36-2531 never came into effect as drug enforcement statutes but only in a substantially amended form.”
State v. Cramer, 851 P.2d 147 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1992). “In A.R.S. § 36-2512(A)(3)(n), the Legislature classified cannabis (marijuana) as a Schedule I controlled substance and recognized its potential for abuse.”
State of Iowa v. Pamela Mildred Middlekauff (Iowa 2022). “Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 36-2512 ; Ariz. Admin.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 36-2512(3) — 1 case
State v. Dungan, 718 P.2d 1010 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1985). “He contends that §§ 36-2512 and 36-2531 never came into effect as drug enforcement statutes but only in a substantially amended form.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 36-2512(A)(3)(n) — 1 case
State v. Cramer, 851 P.2d 147 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1992). “In A.R.S. § 36-2512(A)(3)(n), the Legislature classified cannabis (marijuana) as a Schedule I controlled substance and recognized its potential for abuse.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.