Noland v. State

Summary

The Court affirmed the dismissal of Noland’s as-applied constitutional challenge because he lacked standing: the prior application was submitted by his LLC, and his proposed future application presented only a speculative basis for judicial review. The Court held that Noland could pursue a facial challenge because the alleged injury arose from the application procedures themselves, not merely from an ultimate denial of a certificate. It reversed the facial-challenge ruling and remanded for analysis of the constitutional claims on their merits.