Home | Search | By Category
By House Bill | By Senate Bill |  By Chapter

 
.

CATEGORIES

CIVIL
CIVIL TRAFFIC
COURT ADMINISTRATION
CRIMINAL
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
FAMILY LAW
.
2008 Arizona Judicial Branch End-of Session Legislative Report Cover
.

CATEGORIES

GOVERNMENT
JUVENILE
OTHER
PROBATE
TRANSPORTATION
VETOED
.
 
   

Chapter 25

SB1068

Effective Date
General

Item of interest to:
Superior Court:
Chief Probation Officer
Clerk of the Court
Court Administrator
Clerk
Judge
Jury Commissioner/Manager
Justice Court:
Court Administrator
Clerk
Justice of the Peace
Municipal Court:
Court Administrator
Clerk
Judge/Magistrate
Administrative Office of the Courts

RELATING TO CRIMINAL APPEALS
Sen. Chuck Gray

Prohibits a defendant from appealing a final judgment of conviction, verdict of guilty except insane or an order denying a motion for a new trial if the defendant’s absence prevents sentencing from occurring within 90 days of the conviction and the defendant fails to prove by clear and convincing evidence that the absence was involuntary.

Statutes amended: A.R.S. § 13-4033

Court Impact:  Prohibits a defendant's appeal from a final judgment of a conviction or verdict of guilty except insane or an order denying a motion for a new trial if the defendant's absence prevents sentencing from occurring within 90 days of the conviction. In order to retain the right to appeal the defendant must prove to the court by clear and convincing evidence that absence at time of sentencing was involuntary.

Back to Top

 

 

 

Chapter 40

SB1057

Effective Date
General

Item of interest to:
Superior Court:
Chief probation Officer
Court Administrator
Judge
Justice Court:
Court Administrator
Municipal Court:
Court Administrator
Administrative Office of the Courts

LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER; DEFINITION; REPRESENTATION
Sen. Chuck Gray

“Probationary employee” is removed from the definition of probation, correction, and detention officers for purposes of rights associated with disciplinary actions. The bill is designed to ensure probationary employees do not enjoy the same rights under the statute as permanent employees in internal investigations.

Statute amended:  A.R.S. § 38-1101

Court Impact:  Excludes probationary "Probation officer" employed by this state or a political subdivision of this state from the rights granted to permanent employees.

Back to Top

Chapter 46

HB2587

Effective Date
General

Item of interest to:
Superior Court:
Clerk of the Court
Court Administrator
Clerk
Judge
Justice Court:
Court Administrator
Clerk
Justice of the Peace
 
Administrative Office of the Courts

EXTENSION OF CREDIT; IDENTITY THEFT
Rep. Robson

A lender who does not use a consumer credit report in approving an application for an extension of credit is prohibited from lending money or extending credit unless the lender takes reasonable steps prior to extending credit or lending money to verify the consumer’s identity and confirm that the application for extension of credit is not the result of an identity theft.

A lender who uses a consumer credit report in approving an application for an extension of credit is required to take reasonable steps to verify the consumer’s identity and confirm that the application for extension of credit is not the result of identity theft if:

  • The lender was notified that a police report was filed with a consumer reporting agency and that the applicant was a victim of identity theft, or
  • The creditor was notified that the applicant placed a fraud alert or security freeze on the applicant’s credit report.

If a consumer proves by a preponderance of evidence that an extender of credit extended credit without taking reasonable steps to verify the consumer’s identity, it may be inferred that someone other than the consumer received the extension of credit.

A violation of A.R.S. §44-1698 (consumer credit reports; extension of credit; identity theft; security freeze; definition) constitutes an unlawful practice under A.R.S. §44-1522 (unlawful practices; intended interpretation of provisions), relating to consumer fraud, and is subject to enforcement by the Attorney General or through private action. Injunctive relief may be sought in order to prevent future violations of A.R.S. §44-1698. The remedies in the bill are not the only remedies available to a person whose identity was used to secure an extension of credit. Exclusions include increases in, changes to or reviews of existing open-end credit plans from qualifying as extensions of credit. Financial institutions that are required to have a customer identification program pursuant to federal regulation are exempted.

“Reasonable steps” is defined as any commercially reasonable action taken by an extender of credit that is intended to improve identity verification or confirmation or to lessen the likelihood of identity theft or aggravated identity theft.

Statute created:  A.R.S. § 44-1698

Court Impact:  Provides that if a consumer proves by a preponderance of evidence that an extender of credit extended credit without taking reasonable steps to verify the consumer’s identity, it may be inferred that someone other than the consumer received the extension of credit.

States that a violation of A.R.S. § 44-1698 constitutes an unlawful practice under A.R.S. §44-1522, relating to consumer fraud, and is subject to enforcement by the Attorney General or through private action.

Back to Top

Chapter 53

HB2620

Effective Date
Emergency
4/18/2008

Item of interest to:
Superior Court:
Court Administrator
Justice Court:
Court Administrator
Municipal Court:
Court Administrator
Administrative Office of the Courts

BUDGET; FISCAL YEAR 2007-2008
Rep. Boone

The bill makes $1.36 billion in adjustments to the previously enacted fiscal year (FY) 2008 budget. It transfers $487 million from the Budget Stabilization Fund, reverts approximately $296 million from various funds to the state general fund (GF), postpones a $272 million payment to schools until FY 08-09 (K-12 rollover), and reduces state agency operating budgets by approximately $309.7 million.

In pertinent part, HB2620 permanently reduces the judiciary operating budget by $1.1 million and transfers the following amounts to the state GF:

  • Juvenile delinquent reduction fund- $1,552,900
  • Judicial collection enhancement fund- $1,500,000
  • Supreme Court CJEF disbursement fund- $1,500,000
  • Arizona lengthy trial fund- $1,000,000.

Session Law - Budget

Court Impact:  Informational

Back to Top

Chapter 54

SB1050

Effective Date
General

Item of interest to:
Superior Court:
Clerk of the Court
Court Administrator
Judge
 
 
Administrative Office of the Courts

COURT REPORTER CERTIFICATION
Sen. Linda Gray

The statutory requirement for certificates issued by the Board of Certified Court Reporters to be renewed every year is removed and instead allows the time frame for the expiration and renewal of certificates is to be set in Rule. The sunset date of the Board is repealed.

Statute amended:  A.R.S. §32-4023
Statute repealed:  A.R.S. §32-4009

Court Impact:  Allows court reporter certification renewal and expiration to be set by Supreme Court Rule.

Back to Top

Chapter 69

SB1274

Effective Date
General

Item of interest to:
Superior Court:
Court Administrator
Justice Court:
Court Administrator
 
Administrative Office of the Courts

ACJC; COLD CASE INVESTIGATION PROTOCOL
Sen. Huppenthal

The Arizona Criminal Justice Commission (ACJC) is required to compile and distribute information on best practices for cold case investigations, including effective victim communication procedures. “Cold case” is defined as a homicide or a felony sexual assault that remains unsolved a year or more after being reported to a law enforcement agency and has no viable and unexplored investigative leads.

Statute amended:  A.R.S. § 41-2405

Court Impact:  Informational, provides a duty for ACJC to compile and distribute information on best practices for cold case investigations including effective communications with victims. Defines "Cold Case" as an unsolved case more than a year old after being reported to law enforcement involving a homicide or felony assault with no viable or unexplored investigative leads.

Back to Top

Chapter 75

SB1456

Effective Date
General

Item of interest to:
Superior Court:
Chief Probation Officer
Clerk of the Court
Court Administrator
Judge
Justice Court:
Court Administrator
Clerk
Justice of the Peace
Municipal Court:
Court Administrator
Clerk
Judge/Magistrate
Administrative Office of the Courts

PUBLIC RECORDS; STORAGE
Sen. Ron Gould

The production or reproduction of public records on photography, film, microfiche, digital imaging or other electronic media is provided for, and the records are exempted from statutory size requirements. Source records that have been reproduced and safeguarded against loss may be destroyed after an administrative audit and upon approval by the Director of the Arizona State Library, Archives, and Public Records.

Statutes amended:  A.R.S. § 39-103, 41-1347 and 41-1348

Court Impact:  Information, court records are covered by the Arizona Code of Judicial Administration and court rule.

Back to Top

Chapter 76

SB1022

Effective Date
General

Item of interest to:
Superior Court:
Clerk of the Court
Court Administrator
Clerk
Judge
Jury Commissioner/Manager
Justice Court:
Court Administrator
Justice of the Peace
Jury Commissioner/Manager
Municipal Court:
Court Administrator
Judge/Magistrate
Jury Commissioner/Manger
Administrative Office of the Courts

JURY FEES; TECHNICAL CORRECTION
Sen. Chuck Gray

An incorrect section number from the last year’s jury bill (SB 1434) is corrected. The incorrect statute referenced was A.R.S. §21-211, the bill replaces it with a reference to §21-221 within §21-428 (costs and expenses; state grand jury)

Statute amended:  A.R.S. § 21-428

Court Impact:  Technical reference correction of SB 1434 from 2007 relating to Grand jury service.

Back to Top

Chapter 80

SB1174

Effective Date
General

Item of interest to:
Superior Court:
Clerk of the Court
Court Administrator
Judge
 
 
Administrative Office of the Courts

NOTARY PUBLIC; REGISTRATION
Sen. Tibshraeny

Specific administrative duties related to notaries are transferred from the clerk of the superior court to the Secretary of State (SOS). Notary public certification and oath & bond filing fees will be paid to the SOS instead of the clerk of the superior court. Current law distributes these fees based on county population. SB 1174 applies the distribution percentage currently in statute for counties with a population exceeding 500,000 persons to all counties, except that monies currently deposited into the county general fund are diverted into the Notary Bond Fund. The Notary Bond Fund is established to defray the cost of the SOS assuming the additional administrative duties related to notary certificates, oaths and bonds and the Fund is administered by the SOS.
Contains a Prop 108 clause (two-thirds vote required for passage).

Statutes amended:  A.R.S.§ 8-135, 8-550.01, 12-113, 12-135, 12-284, 12-305, 33-502, 36-3002, 38-233, 38-810, 41-126, 41-312, 41-315, 41-317, 41-322, 41-330, 41-2402
Statutes created:  A.R.S. §41-178, 41-314
Statute repealed:  A.R.S. §41-332

Court Impact:  Transfers responsibility for for filing the oath and bond of a notary public, for issuing a certificate as to official capacity of a notary public and affixing a seal to the certificate from the clerk of superior court to the secretary of state. Maintains the distribution of funds by the secretary of state in the same percentages to the alternative dispute resolution fund, the judicial collection enhancement fund, the confidential intermediary and fiduciary fund and child abuse prevention fund. The change requires superior court to update their fee schedule in their automation system.

Back to Top

Chapter 82

SB1186

Effective Date
General

Item of interest to:
Superior Court:
Court Administrator
Judge
 
 
Administrative Office of the Courts

JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE REVIEWS; COURT COMMISSIONERS
Sen. Chuck Gray

The Supreme Court is required by statute to establish a process through Rule for evaluating superior court commissioner performance in counties with populations of 250,000 or more. The Rule must include written performance standards and performance reviews that survey people who have knowledge of the superior court commissioner’s performance. Public participation in the process through hearings and public dissemination of reports is required. The Supreme Court is required to publish and maintain current and previous evaluation reports on its website.

Note that population is based upon the most recent decennial census (A.R.S. §1-215)

Statute created:  A.R.S. §12-119.04

Court Impact:  Requires the Supreme Court to establish a process through Rule for evaluating superior court commissioner performance in counties with a population of 250,000 or more. The process shall be adopted by Supreme Court Rule and will include written performance standards and performance reviews. The evaluations will be published on the Supreme Court website. Note that population is based upon the most recent decennial census (A.R.S. §1-215). Currently the only two counties which qualify are Maricopa and Pima Counties until the next census.

Back to Top 

Chapter 97

HB2129

Effective Date
General

Item of interest to:
Superior Court:
Chief Probation Officer
Clerk of the Court
Court Administrator
Clerk
Judge
Justice Court:
Court Administrator
Clerk
Justice of the Peace
 
Administrative Office of the Courts

INTERNET AGE MISREPRESENTATION
Rep. Robson

The crime of “Unlawful age misrepresentation”, a Class 3 felony, is established. A person commits this offense by using an electronic communication device to knowingly misrepresent the person’s age for the purpose of committing any sexual offense that would require registration as a sex offender. The person must be at least 18 years old and know or have reason to know that the recipient of the communication is a minor. The offense is added to the list of acts that require registration as a sex offender. It is not a defense to a prosecution if the recipient is not a minor. A police officer acting within the scope of the officer’s authority and in the line of duty is exempted.

If the victim is under 15 years old, Unlawful age misrepresentation is classified and punishable as a Dangerous crime against children with the following sentences:

  • If the person has not been previously convicted of a predicate felony, the presumptive term is 10 years
  • If the person has been previously convicted of a predicate felony, the presumptive term is 15 years.

“Electronic communication device” is defined as any device that is capable of transmitting visual depictions and includes: computers, computer systems or network, and cellular or wireless telephones.

Statutes amended:  A.R.S. §§ 13-604.01, 13-3560, and 13-3821

Court Impact:  The change requires courts to update their automation system for the violation in A.R.S. § 13-3560(A) as a class 3 felony for unlawful age misrepresentation. The bill conflicts w/HB2480 chapter 219 which designates this same section as aggravating luring of a minor as a class 2 felony. Also, requires the clerk to notify the sheriff in that county of the conviction within ten days after entry of the judgment.

Back to Top

Chapter 109

HB2443

Effective Date
General

Item of interest to:
Superior Court:
Court Administrator
Judge
Justice Court:
Court Administrator
Justice of the Peace
 
Administrative Office of the Courts

CONSTABLES; ETHICS; TRAINING
Rep. Kavanagh

The minimum amount of annual training that constables are required to attend is increased to 16 hours. Monies from the Constable Ethics Standards and Training fund may used to pay for constable training.
Statute amended: A.R.S. §22-137

Statute amended:  A.R.S. §22-137

Court Impact:  Informational, regarding training requirements for constables.

Back to Top

Chapter 115

HB2566

Effective Date
Emergency
04/28/2008

Item of interest to:
 
Justice Court:
Court Administrator
Clerk
Justice of the Peace
Municipal Court:
Court Administrator
Clerk
Judge/Magistrate
Administrative Officer of the Courts

SCHOOLS; STUDENT TEACHERS; TUTORS; FINGERPRINTING
Rep. Anderson

In pertinent part, renumbers A.R.S. §15-534 (H) to §15-534 (I). This statute makes it a Class 3 misdemeanor to provide a false statement, representation or certification on any application to the Department of Education for certification.

Statute amended:  A.R.S. § 15-534

Court Impact:  Technical renumbering of the violation section, renumbers A.R.S. § 15-534(h) to 15-534(I) a class 3 misdemeanor. The change requires the court to update their automation system. Also provides that any person who participates in a teacher preparation program that is approved by the state board or any person who is contracted by this state, by a school district or by a charter school to provide tutoring services shall obtain a fingerprint clearance card pursuant to this section before the person participates in field experience in which services will be provided directly to pupils.

Back to Top

Chapter 138

HB2554

Effective Date
General

Item of interest to:
Superior Court:
Court Administrator
Justice Court:
Court Administrator
Clerk
Justice of the Peace
 
Administrative Office of the Courts

JUSTICE COURTS; CRIMINAL ACTION; JURISDICTION
Rep. Biggs

Time payment fee and any other penalties or additional assessments are excluded when calculating the total fine for the purposes of determining justice of the peace jurisdiction.

Statute amended:  A.R.S. §22-301

Court Impact:  Technical clarification concerning the jurisdictional limits of justice courts.

Back to Top

Chapter 150

HB2623

Effective Date
General

Item of interest to:
Superior Court:
Court Administrator
Judge
Justice Court:
Court Administrator
Justice of the Peace
 
Administrative Office of the Courts

CONSTABLES; PEACE OFFICERS STATUS
Rep. Pearce

The definition of a peace officer is expanded to include constables, however, a constable has peace officer authority only during performance of official duties. Deputies appointed by constables are required to meet the minimum peace officer qualifications set forth by the Arizona Peace Officers Standards and Training board.

Statutes amended:  A.R.S. §13-105, 22-131, 41-1823

Court Impact:  Informational, constables are now included in the definition of peace officers but only in the performance of their official duties. A deputy constable must now be certified by Arizona Peace Officers Standards and Training board.

Back to Top

Chapter 152

HB2745

Effective Date
Emergency
05/01/2008

Item of interest to:
Superior Court:
Chief Probation Officer
Clerk of the Court
Court Administrator
Clerk
Judge
Justice Court:
Court Administrator
Clerk
Justice of the Peace
Municipal Court:
Court Administrator
Clerk
Judge Magistrate
Administrative office of the Courts

EMPLOYER SANCTIONS AMENDMENTS
Rep. Pearce

The bill makes significant changes to the Employer Sanctions Law from last year including:

  1. Expanding statutory identity theft:  The definition of “taking the identity of another person” is expanded to include accepting personal identification information of another person with the intent of obtaining or continuing employment. The definition of trafficking in the identity of another person” is expanded to include the intent of obtaining or continuing employment.
  2. Establishing protocols for allegations of and punishments for violations of employing unauthorized aliens:  A complaint must be filed on form prescribed by the Attorney General (AG); requiring notarization or the social security number of the person filling out the complaint is prohibited. The ‘frivolous’ standard is changed to ‘false and frivolous’. The AG and county attorney may investigate allegations not submitted on the complaint form; prohibits the investigation of complaints based solely on race, color or national origin. Complaints are required be filed in the county in which the alleged unauthorized alien was employed. The county sheriff and local law enforcement agency may assist in investigating a complaint; prohibits any state, county or local officer from making an independent determination as to whether or not an individual is authorized to work in the United States.

    If, after an investigation, it is determined that the allegation is not ‘false and frivolous,’ the AG is tasked with certain enumerated requirements.
    For a first violation the court must order:
    1. The employer to terminate all unauthorized alien employees;
    2. The employer to a five year term of probation for the business location where the unauthorized alien worked;
    3. The appropriate agencies to suspend all license held by the employer for a minimum of ten days; and
    4. The employer to sign a sworn affidavit which states that the employer has terminated the employment of all unauthorized aliens and will not intentionally or knowingly employ an unauthorized alien.

    When determining whether or not an individual is an unauthorized alien the court is only permitted to consider the federal government’s determination. Licenses eligible for suspension are those specific to the site where the unauthorized alien worked. If the employer does not have a license specific to the particular location, the employer’s general license is suspended. The length of suspension of relevant licenses is determined by the court based on:

    1. The number of unauthorized aliens employed;
    2. Any prior misconduct by the employer;
    3. The degree of harm resulting from the violation;
    4. The duration of the violation,;
    5. Whether or not the employer made a good faith effort to comply with regulations; and
    6.  Any other factors the court deems appropriate.

    For a second violation licenses are permanently revoked rather than suspended.

  3.  Amending state employment law requirements
  4.  Establishes requirements of government entities when entering into contracts and of employers to receive state benefits:
    Various situations and circumstances to the law requiring the participation in the E-Verify program are added.
  5.  Clarifying confusion surrounding ‘independent contractors’ and redefining related terms:

    The terms ‘”independent contractor” and “social security number verification service” are defined. Factors for determining if an individual is an independent contractor are enumerated. In cases of independent contractor, the independent contractor is the employer, not the person that uses the contract labor. “Employee,” “employ” and “employer” are defined.

Emergency Clause: effective May 1, 2008

Statutes amended:  A.R.S. §13-2008, 13-2010, 23-211, 23-212, 23-214
Statutes created:  A.R.S. §23-212.01, 23-215, 23-216, 23-361.01, 41-1080, 41-4401

Court Impact:  The definition of ‘taking the identity of another person’ is expanded to include accepting personal identification information of another person "with the intent of obtaining or continuing employment." (A.R.S. §13-2008(A)) The definition of ‘trafficking in the identity of another person’ is expanded to include the "allowing another person to obtain or continue employment." (A.R.S. §13-2010(A))

The bill adds a class 4 felony for "knowingly accepting the identity of another person" when a person both accepts any personal identifying information knowing that the person is not the identified person and then uses the provided information for work authorization under federal law. A.R.S. §13-2008 (B)

The bill clarifies the definition of employee and excludes independent contractors from the definition. An “independent contractor” is included in the definition of employer. (A.R.S. § 13-2010(C)(4)) A separate definition of independent contractor is added by the bill. The Basic Pilot Program is changed to the E-Verify Program. The bill separates the offenses of “knowingly employing” unauthorized aliens and “intentionally employing” unauthorized aliens.

The bill adds a class 3 misdemeanor for filing a false and frivolous complaint. (A.R.S. § 23-212.01(B))

The bill requires the Attorney General’s Office to post the court orders for employer violation, a list of Arizona employers registered with the federal E-verify program and employers enrolled in the voluntary enhanced compliance program on their websites.

The bill requires an employer with two or more employees that are paid in cash to comply with state laws relating to income tax withholding, employer reporting, employment security (unemployment) and workers' compensation. Failure to comply may result in the Attorney General filing an action in superior court. If the court finds a violation, the court shall order the employer to pay a civil penalty that is equal to treble the amount of all withholdings, payments, contributions or premiums that the employer failed to remit as prescribed by subsection a of this section or five thousand dollars for each employee for whom a violation was committed, whichever is greater. (A.R.S. § 23-361.01(B)) The funds are deposited with the State Treasurer in the general fund. (A.R.S. § 23-361.01(C))

The bill also establishes requirements for government entities when entering into contracts. (A.R.S. § 41-4401)

The changes require the court to update their automation system.

Back to Top 

Chapter 171

HB2190

Effective Date
General

Item of interest to:
Superior Court:
Court Administrator
Judge
Justice Court:
Court Administrator
Justice of the Peace
 
Administrative Office of the Courts

CONSTABLE ETHICS; BOARD; MEMBERSHIP
Rep. Griggs

One member of the Constable Ethics Standards and Training Board must be a board member of the Arizona Multi-Housing Association at the time of appointment.

Statutes amended:  A.R.S. §22-136

Court Impact:  Informational pertaining to constables.

Back to Top

Chapter 185

SB1043

Effective Date
General

Item of interest to:
Superior Court:
Chief Probation Officer
Court Administrator
Judge
 
 
Administrative Office of the Courts

CORP; JUDICIARY; OTHER DESIGNATED POSITION
Sen. Tibshraeny

The local board of the judiciary under the Correctional Officer Retirement Plan (CORP) may designate a position within the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) as a CORP position if the employee filling the position:

  • Is a current member of CORP
  • Is already in a designated position in the judiciary
  • Has at least five years of credited service in CORP
  • Has direct contact with and primarily provides training or technical expertise to probation, surveillance or juvenile detention officers.

The position is returned to non-designated status when the employee leaves the position.

Statutes Amended:  A.R.S. §38-881 as amended by laws 2007, 38-891

Court Impact:  Allows a probation officer meeting the established qualifications to accept employment with the AOC without losing their members in the CORP retirement plan. The position is returned to non-designated status when the employee leaves the position.

Back to Top

Chapter 193

SB1339

Effective Date
General

Item of interest to:
Superior Court:
Chief Probation Officer
Court Administrator
Judge
 
Municipal Court:
Court Administrator
Judge/Magistrate
Administrative Office of the Courts

LAW ENFORCEMENT; PROBATION; OFFICERS; INVESTIGATIONS
Sen. Linda Gray

The employer of a law enforcement or probation officer may require an employee to submit to a polygraph if the officer makes a statement during an investigation that differs from information known to the employer about the investigation and it is necessary to reconcile the differences in order to complete the investigation. The polygraph must be recorded and a copy must be provided to the officer.

The right to a peremptory change of hearing officer that currently applies to cases being heard by the office of administrative hearings is expanded to include cases where the employer is located in a county of 250,000 or more or a city of 65,000 or more. The employer carries the burden of proof in the appeal of a disciplinary action. The definition of a disciplinary action is modified to include any dismissal, demotion or suspension of more than 24 hours, currently 40 hours.

Note that population is based on most recent decennial census.

Statute Amended:  A.R.S. §38-1101

Court Impact:  A court employing a probation officer in a county with a population greater than 250,000 or a city with a population greater than 65,000 or more persons may require a probation officer to submit to a polygraph test. The test may only be conducted if the officer makes a statement to the employer during an investigation that differs from other information relating to the investigation that is known to the employer and reconciling that difference is necessary to complete the investigation.

Back to Top

Chapter 197

SB1440

Effective Date
General

Item of interest to:
Superior Court:
Clerk of Court
Court Administrator
Judge
Clerk
 
 
Administrative Office of the Courts

CHILD DEPENDENCY CASES; PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
Sen. Landrum-Taylor

The Administrative Office of the Court (AOC) is required to develop judicial performance standards for courts that handle child dependency cases on or before December 31,2008 and to conduct a review of the implementation of the standards and the impact of these standards on the judicial management of child dependency cases on or before December 31, 2009. The AOC is to report the findings to the Governor, the Speaker of the House, and the President of the Senate by February 1, 2010.

Repealed October 1, 2011

Statute Impacted: Session Law

Court Impact: Informational

Back to Top

Chapter 198

SB1441

Effective Date
General

Item of interest to:
Superior Court:
Clerk of Court
Court Administrator
Judge
Clerk
 
 
Administrative Office of the Courts

FOSTER CARE; EXPEDITED PERMANENCY
Sen. Landrum-Taylor

The list of sufficient evidence for justifiable termination of a parent/child relationship is expanded to include circumstances in which a child under the age of three has been in an out-of-home placement for a cumulative period of six months or longer and the parent(s) substantially neglected or willfully refused to remedy the circumstances that necessitated the removal of the child. Neglect or refusal may include failure to participate in reunification services offered by the Department of Economic Security (DES). The court is required to inform all parents at the preliminary protective hearing of this expanded justification.

The court must determine within six months of removal if reasonable efforts have been made to provide reunification services to the parent of the child under the age of three. The court is prohibited from postponing the permanency hearing beyond six months unless the party seeking the postponement shows that the court has already determined or will determine within six months of the child’s removal that reasonable efforts have been made to provide reunification services to the parent. At the first periodic review hearing the court must determine whether the parent of a child under three years of age substantially neglected or willfully refused to participate in reunification services.

The right to be heard in any proceeding held with respect to a child is expanded to include any foster parent, pre-adoptive parent, or a member of the child’s family with whom the child is placed or who has been identified as a possible placement for the child. The court is required to provide notification of this right at the preliminary protective hearing. At the hearing, if the child is not returned to the parent or guardian, the court shall notify a relative of the right to be heard in any proceeding to be held with respect to the child if a relative is identified as a possible placement for the child, DES must make reasonable efforts to place a child in a timely manner.

Statutes Amended: A.R.S. §8-113, 8-533, 8-824, 8-829, 8-847, 8-862

Court Impact: Requires juvenile court to hold a hearing within ninety days for a child under three years of age or has resided in the home of the prospective adoptive parent or parents for at least six months preceding the filing of the petition for adoption on a petition to remove the child from the prospective adoptive parents home. Expands the grounds for termination of a parent/child relationship to include circumstances in which a child under the age of three has been in an out-of-home placement for a cumulative period of six months or longer and the parent(s) substantially neglected or willfully refused to remedy the circumstances that necessitated the removal of the child.

The court is required to provide notification of the right to be heard in any proceeding held with respect to a child including any foster parent, pre-adoptive parent, or a member of the child’s family with whom the child is placed or who has been identified as a possible placement for the child at the preliminary protective hearing.

Back to Top

Chapter 199

SB1442

Effective Date
General

Item of interest to:
Superior Court:
Clerk of Court
Court Administrator
Judge
Clerk
 
 
Administrative Office of the Courts

DEPENDENT CHILDREN; PLACEMENT; HEARINGS
Sen. Landrum-Taylor

The right to be heard in any proceeding held with respect to a child is expanded to include any foster parent, pre-adoptive parent, or a member of the child’s family with whom the child is placed, and the court is required to provide notification of this right at the preliminary protective hearing. If a relative is identified as a possible placement, the court must notify the relative of the right to be heard in any proceeding with respect to the child.

Statute Amended: A.R.S. §8-824

Court Impact: The court shall inform a foster parent, pre-adoptive parent, or a member of the child’s family with whom the department has placed the child at the preliminary protective hearing of their right to be heard in any proceeding held. At the hearing, if the child is not returned to the parent or guardian, the court shall, if a relative is identified as a possible placement, notify the relative of the right to be heard in any proceeding with respect to the child.

Back to Top

Chapter 234

HB2117

Effective Date
General

Item of interest to:
Superior Court:
Chief Probation Officer
Court Administrator
Judge
 
 
Administrative Office of the Courts

CORP; MEMBER CONTRIBUTIONS; DISABILITY
REP. MCCLURE

The requirement that liabilities be funded 100% before ordinary disability may be available to members of CORP is removed. The contribution rate for members, excluding full-time dispatchers, is set at 8.41% starting July 1, 2009 and a reduction of the member contribution to 7.96% is permitted if liabilities were completely funded the previous fiscal year.

Statute Amended: A.R.S. §38-891
Statute Repealed: Laws 2007, Chapter 261, Section 17

Court Impact: Establishes contribution rates for the Corrections Officer Retirement plan which includes probation officers.

Back to Top

Chapter 245

HB2378

Effective Date
General

Item of interest to:
Superior Court:
Clerk of Court
Court Administrator
Judge
Clerk
Justice Court:
Court Administrator
Justice of the Peace
Clerk
 
Administrative Office of the Courts

COUNTIES; DEBIT CARD ACCEPTANCE
Rep. DeSimone

The legislative authority of county boards of supervisors is expanded to allow for the acceptance of credit and debit cards. The individual paying via credit or debit card is required to pay for any cost incurred as a result, unless the charging entity determines that the benefits of accepting debit and credit cards exceeds the accompanying fees.

Statute Impacted: A.R.S. §11-251

Court Impact: Informational, allows the credit/debit card service fees or costs for payments to the court to be passed on to the person tendering payment if the Board of Supervisors approves.

Back to Top

Chapter 251

HB2109

Effective Date
General

Item of interest to:
Superior Court:
Chief Probation Officer
Court Administrator
Judge
 
 
Administrative Office of the Courts

INTERSTATE COMPACT; ANNUAL ASSESSMENT
Rep. Yarbrough

The requirement of a legislative appropriation for an increase to Arizona’s annual Interstate Compact for Supervision of Adult Offenders assessment in excess of the statutory amount is replaced with the requirement of a report to the Joint Legislative Budget Committee (in addition to the existing approval of the assessment by the state council).

Statute Amended: A.R.S. §12-267, 31-467

Court Impact: Informational, allows monies in the adult probation services fund to be used to pay the annual assessment on member states of the interstate compact for the supervision of adult offenders. The state council shall notify the joint legislative budget committee of any increase in the assessment.

Back to Top

Chapter 258

SB1165

Effective Date
General

Item of interest to:
Superior Court:
Court Administrator
Justice Court:
Court Administrator
Justice of the Peace
Clerk
Municipal Court:
Court Administrator
Judge/Magistrate
Clerk
Administrative Office of the Courts

SALVAGE TITLE; STOLEN VEHICLE TITLE
Sen. Gorman

In pertinent part, renumbers A.R.S. § 28-2091(L) to §28-2091(M). This statute makes it a Class 1 misdemeanor for a person to sell a vehicle with a certificate of title if the person has actual knowledge that the air bag, air bag module or components of the vehicle’s air bag system compromising the functional integrity of the air bag system deployed or were removed from the vehicle and the person, with the intent to conceal this information, fails to disclose this to the buyer before the sale is complete.

Statute Amended: A.R.S. §28-2091

Court Impact: Renumbers A.R.S. § 28-2091(L) to §28-2091(M), a class 1 misdemeanor. The change requires the court to update their automation system. Defines "Stolen vehicle certificate of title."

Back to Top

Chapter 277

HB2159

Effective Date
General

Item of interest to:
Superior Court:
Chief Probation Officer
Clerk of Court
Court Administrator
Judge
Clerk
Jury Commissioner/Manager
Justice Court:
Court Administrator
Justice of the Peace
Clerk
Jury Commissioner/Manager
Municipal Court:
Court Administrator
Judge/Magistrate
Clerk
Jury Commissioner/Manager
Administrative Office of the Courts

DISCIPLINARY RECORDS; OPEN TO INSPECTION
Rep. Paton

All public bodies are required to maintain all records necessary to ensure an accurate knowledge of disciplinary actions of any public officer or employee. These records are open to inspection and available for copying unless specifically prohibited by law, including employee responses to disciplinary actions.

Statute Impacted: A.R.S. § 39-128

Court Impact: Rule 123, RASC, makes disciplinary records of the court confidential.

Back to Top

Chapter 279

HB2454

Effective Date
General

Item of interest to:
Superior Court:
Chief Probation Officer
Clerk of Court
Court Administrator
Judge
Clerk
 
 
Administrative Office of the Courts

PUBLIC RECORDS; CPS INFORMATION
Rep. Paton

The list of people to whom CPS information must be provided is expanded to include law enforcement, a prosecutor, and an attorney or guardian ad litem representing a child victim of crime. The list of reasons why information must be provided is expanded to include information to a defendant after a criminal charge has been filed as required by an order of the criminal court. CPS is required to promptly provide information to the public pertaining to child abuse, abandonment or neglect that resulted in a fatality or near fatality.

CPS is required to promptly release any requested information and to consult with the county attorney’s office as to whether or not releasing such information would cause a specific, material harm to a criminal investigation. CPS is prohibited from releasing information if the county attorney demonstrates that release would cause specific, material harm to a criminal investigation or if the release if it would violate federal law, would likely endanger the safety of any person, or would violate the privacy rights of a child victim of crime.

Any person may file an action in superior court if the person believes that the county attorney has failed to demonstrate the specific, material harm to a criminal investigation and request the court to take an in camera review and order disclosure of the information. A person who has been denied CPS information, or is not specifically authorized to obtain information, may bring a special action in the superior court to order the department to release the information. The court must take all reasonable steps to prevent any clearly unwarranted invasions of privacy and protect the privacy and dignity of child victims of crime.

CPS information provided to a legislator pursuant to statute may only be further disclosed as enumerated in statute.

The court may release CPS information to a person not specifically authorized only if it determines that the rights of the parties seeking the information outweigh the rights of the parties who are entitled to confidentiality.

Statute Amended: A.R.S. § 8-807

Court Impact:

Requires information be provided to a defendant after a criminal charge has been filed as required by an order of the criminal court.

Any person may file an action in superior court if the person believes that the county attorney has failed to demonstrate the specific, material harm to a criminal investigation and request the court to take an in camera review and order disclosure of the information. A person who has been denied CPS information, or is not specifically authorized to obtain information, may bring a special action in the superior court to order the department to release the information. The court must take all reasonable steps to prevent any clearly unwarranted invasions of privacy and protect the privacy and dignity of child victims of crime.

A person who has been denied CPS information regarding a fatality or near fatality caused by abuse, abandonment or neglect may bring a special action pursuant to section 39-121.02 in the superior court to order the department to release that CPS information. The department or a person who is not specifically authorized by this section to obtain CPS information may petition a judge of the superior court to order the department to release cps information. The plaintiff shall provide notice to the county attorney, who has standing and may participate in the action. The court shall review the requested records in camera and shall balance the rights of the parties who are entitled to confidentiality pursuant to this section against the rights of the parties who are seeking the release of the CPS information. The court may release otherwise confidential cps information only if the rights of the parties seeking the CPS information and any benefits from releasing the cps information outweigh the rights of the parties who are entitled to confidentiality and any harm that may result from releasing the cps information.

Courts should be aware of the technical change that renumbers A.R.S. § 8-807(S) as A.R.S. § 8-807(T) and A.R.S. § 8-821(H) as A.R.S. § 8-821(G).

Back to Top

Chapter 286

HB2210

Effective Date
Conditional
09/26/2008

Item of interest to:
Superior Court:
Chief Probation Officer
Clerk of Court
Court Administrator
Judge
Clerk
Jury Commissioner/Manager
Justice Court:
Court Administrator
Justice of the Peace
Clerk
Jury Commissioner/Manager
Municipal Court:
Court Administrator
Judge/Magistrate
Clerk
Jury Commissioner/Manager
Administrative Office of the Courts

BUDGET RECONCILIATION; CRIMINAL JUSTICE
Rep. Burns

Numerous statutory and session law changes relating to the justice system in order to comply with the FY 2009 budget outlined in HB 2209 are enacted. In pertinent part, HB 2210 does the following:

Filing Fees

  • Increases civil filing fees in Justice of the Peace (JP) courts and superior courts by 44% and directs a portion of JP filing fees to the Elected Officials’ Retirement Plan (EORP). Copy fees remain at the current statutory amount of $0.50. The Supreme Court is also permitted to increase these civil fees in the future in an amount not to exceed inflation.
  • Allows the Supreme Court to increase various appellate fees.

Time Payment Fee

  • Repeals the statute that would have returned the Time Payment Fee (TPF) to $12 on January 1, 2010. In effect, this will continue the TPF at $20 indefinitely.

Probation; GPS

  • Allows the court to impose a fee on any probationer required to be on global position monitoring (GPS) for a violation of A.R.S. § 13-604.01 (dangerous crimes against children). The fee is intended to offset the cost of the GPS monitoring and must be deposited in the county’s Adult Probation Services Fund. HB 2210 requires the Administrative Office of the Courts to charge the county’s APS Fund an amount established annually by the AOC to cover a proportional share of the cost of providing GPS monitoring services.

Court Opinions

  • Removes the statutory language requiring the Supreme Court to cover the cost of publishing court opinions for specific agencies. Keeps language that allows any entity to request a copy of opinions as long as the entity pays the contracted price for the copy.

JP Salaries

  • Continues to fund the state share of JP salaries at 38.5%, requiring the county to cover the other 61.5%.
  • Requires the presiding judge of each court to charge a person attending defensive driving school a $45.00 surcharge. The defensive driving school is required to transmit the surcharge to the state treasurer for deposit in the state general fund.

OUI/DUI

  • Allocates the portion of the assessment currently deposited in the state general fund to the newly created public safety and equipment fund.

Extreme DUI

  • Resolves the sentencing conflict in Chapters 195 and 219 from last year by removing the authority of the judge to suspend any portion of the minimum jail sentence in an extreme DUI. Note that Chapter 256 contains an identical provision with a delayed effective date of January 1, 2009. However, with Chapter 286 this provision is effective on September 26, 2008 and is controlling.

Photo Enforcement, Service of Citation, Court Diversion

  • The DPS is required to enter into a contract or contracts with vendors to establish a state photo enforcement system.
  • Enforcement is related to Title 28, Chapter 3, Article 3 (§28-641 – 28-654) and Article 6 (§28-701 – 28-710).
  • Civil Penalty for violating one of the above sections cited through the photo enforcement system is $165.
  • No surcharge is imposed except the 10% clean elections surcharge required by the Arizona Constitution.
  • The citations are not included in judicial productivity credits until July 1, 2009.
  • A photo enforcement fund is established consisting of penalties paid on citations or notices of violation issued through the system.
  • $250,000 is appropriated to DPS each quarter, the remainder is deposited in the state general fund.
  • MVD is prohibited of using a finding of responsibility on a citation or notice of violation cited through the system in determining whether a person’s driver license should be suspended or revoked
  • A court is prohibited from transmitting the abstract of a finding of responsibility of the violations to MVD.
  • Permits a civil violation issued pursuant to §41-1722 to be issued through a notice of violation.
  • If a person fails to respond to the notice of violation or denies responsibility a citation if filed into the applicable court.
  • The Supreme Court is required to establish rules governing the issuance, service and processing of the notice of violation, including rules allowing a person to admit responsibility before a citation if filed into court.

Photo enforcement fund; appropriation

  • $4,056,600 is appropriated to the AOC for the processing of state photo enforcement citations.
    Court diversion fee

Court diversion fee

  • Requires the presiding judge of each court to charge a $45.00 surcharge if a person attends defensive driving school.
  • The driving school must collect the surcharge and transmit it to the state treasurer for deposit in the state general fund.

Statutes Amended: A.R.S. §5-395.01, §5-395.01 as amended by Laws 2008, 5-396, 5-397, 12-108, 12-119.01, 12-267, 12-284 as amended by Laws 2008, 13-902, 22-281, 28-1381, 28-1382, 28-1383, 28-1593, 28-3396, 28-8284, 28-8286, 28-8287, 28-8288, 38-810 as amended by Laws 2008, 41-3541, 41-3542, 41-3014.16, Laws 2000, Ch. 293, §598, Laws 2000, Ch. 193, §599
Statutes Created: A.R.S. §41-1722, 41-1723
Statutes Repealed: A.R.S. §12-116, as amended by Laws 2006, Ch. 369, §2, 28-1382 as amended by Laws 2007, Ch. 195, §3

Court Impact: Increases fees in the superior and justice court and allows the supreme court to increase the fees in the future in an amount not to exceed the consumer price index based on the increase in CPI from the last calendar year in which the last increase occurred. Provides for distribution of justice court fees based on county population. Also allows the supreme court to adjust the fees charged for filing in the supreme court. Requires the AOC to charge each probation department a proportional fee to cover the cost of monitoring devices required by 13-902. The charges are offset by fees imposed on the probationer. Continues the time payment fee at the current $20 level indefinitely and the state share of JP salaries at 38.9%. Requires the presiding judge of a court to establish an additional $45 surcharge for attendance at a defensive driving school. The fee to be collected by the school for deposit with the state treasurer.

Establishes a statewide photo enforcement program for civil traffic violations. The violation may be disposed of prior to the complaint being filed in court according to rules established by the supreme court. Allows a person paid to act on behalf of a traffic enforcement agency to issue the traffic complaint. Requires DPS to select a vendor for the statewide photo enforcement system, prescribes a penalty of $165 plus a 10% surcharge for clean elections, establishes a photo enforcement fund and prohibits these violations from being reported to MVD. Also establishes the Public Safety Equipment Fund and amends OUI, DUI and FUI statutes to provide extra assessments formerly sent to the general fund to be sent to the Public Safety Equipment Fund. Prohibits state photo enforcement citations from be included in justice court judicial productivity credit calculations for fiscal year 2008-2009.

Establishes a new receivable for fees imposed on probationers sentenced for a dangerous crime against children for GPS monitoring. Courts should be aware of the effect of this bill prohibiting disposition reporting to MVD. The changes require courts to update their automation system. A.R.S. § 5-395.01 has a delayed effective date of 1/1/09.

Back to Top

Chapter 288

HB2275

Effective Date
General

Item of interest to:
Superior Court:
Clerk of Court
Court Administrator
Judge
Clerk
Justice Court:
Court Administrator
Justice of the Peace
Clerk
Municipal Court:
Court Administrator
Judge/Magistrate
Clerk
Administrative Office of the Courts

BUDGET RECONCILIATION; HEALTH
Rep. Hershberger

In pertinent part, and beginning January 1, 2010, a process of certification is established for persons employed as behavior analysts conducting habilitation for individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder. The Board of Psychologist Examiners may petition the superior court to enjoin a non-licensed person from practicing behavior analysis or any actions by a licensee that are of immediate threat to the public.

Acts of engaging in behavior analysis without proper licensure, securing a license by fraudulent means, impersonating a board member in order to issue a license, and using any combination of words, initials, or letters in order to give the appearance that one is licensed as a behavioral analyst are criminalized and classified as a Class 2 misdemeanor.

In cases where the state pays the costs of a defendant’s inpatient restoration to competency treatment, HB2275 continues to require Pima County, Maricopa County and all cities to reimburse the Department of Health Services for 86% of the cost for the treatment services in fiscal year 2009.

Statutes Amended: A.R.S. § 32-2065, 36-2901.03, 36-2912
Statutes Created: A.R.S. §36-2912.04, 36-2981.01, 41-3016.28
Statutes Repealed: A.R.S. §41-3008.16

Court Impact: Courts should be aware of the effect of this bill that establishes A.R.S. § 32-2091.12 (A), (B)(1), (B)(2), & (C), as class 2 misdemeanors for acts of engaging in behavior analysis without proper licensure, securing a license by fraudulent means, impersonating a board member in order to issue a license, and using any combination of words, initials, or letters in order to give the appearance that one is licensed as a behavioral analyst. The change requires courts to update their automation system.

Allows the Board of Psychologist Examiner to file a petition in superior court to enjoin a non-licensed person from practicing behavior analysis or any actions by a licensee that are of immediate threat to the public.

Back to Top

Chapter 298

SB1476

Effective Date
General

Item of interest to:
Superior Court:
Chief Probation Officer
Clerk of Court
Court Administrator
Judge
Clerk
 
 
Administrative Office of the Courts

PROBATION; FACILITIES; SAFE COMMUNITIES ACT
SEN. HUPPENTHAL

An earned time credit (ETC) option is established for probation. The court may adjust a probationer’s period of probation for ETC in the amount of 20 days for every 30 days that a probationer meets specific progress-related requirements. Offenders that are on probation for a Class 2 or Class 3 felony, exclusively on probation for a misdemeanor, on lifetime probation or required to register as sex offenders are not eligible for ETC under SB 1476. The ETC option does not affect the ability of the court to terminate probation early pursuant to A.R.S. 13-901 (E). The ETC section of the bill becomes effective January 1, 2009 to allow for rulemaking and is applicable to anyone on probation from and after the effective date of the act (9/26/08).

Fiscal Incentives
Appropriates, beginning in fiscal year (FY) 2011, 40% of the savings achieved by reducing probation revocations resulting in sentences to the Arizona Department of Corrections (ADC) to each county if there is also a reduction in the number of supervised probationers convicted of a new felony offense in that county. SB 1476 outlines the process for calculating the savings and specifies how the appropriated savings must be used. Monies appropriated as savings cannot be used to supplant any other state or county appropriation for probation. A joint report from ADC and the Administrative Office of the Courts containing specific data relating to probation revocations and convictions of new offenses by probationers is due by October 1 of each year and an Auditor General performance audit of the new program must be completed by June 30, 2014.

Statute Amended: A.R.S. §12-267

Court Impact: Allows the court to adjust the time on supervised probation for earned time credit if a probationer; exhibits progress toward the goals and treatment of the probationer's case plan, is current on payments for court ordered restitution and other obligations and is current in completing community restitution. Any credit shall be revoked if a probationer violates a condition of probation. The credit is not available to a probationer; on lifetime probation, on probation for a class 2 or 3 felony, on probation exclusively for a misdemeanor offense or required to register as a sex offender. The Joint Legislative Budget Committee shall annually calculate the cost avoided by reducing the number of people on supervised probation. The legislature shall annually appropriate to the administrative office of the courts forty per cent of any costs that are avoided as calculated to be deposited in the adult probation services fund of each county established pursuant to section 12-267 if there is a reduction in the percentage of people from that county who are on supervised probation and who are convicted of a new felony offense as calculated in subsection a, paragraph 2 of this section. The appropriation may be used to increase the availability of substance abuse treatment programs for probationers, increase the availability of risk reduction programs and interventions for probationers, and for grants to nonprofit victim services organizations to partner with the probation department and the court to assist victims and increase the amount of restitution collected from probationers.

Back to Top

Chapter 301

HB2207

Effective Date
Delayed
1/1/2009

Item of interest to:
Superior Court:
Chief Probation Officer
Court Administrator
Judge
Clerk
Jury Commissioner/Manager
Justice Court:
Court Administrator
Justice of the Peace
Clerk
Municipal Court:
Court Administrator
Judge/Magistrate
Clerk
Administrative Office of the Courts

SENTENCING; REORGANIZATION
Rep. Farnsworth

The classification and sentencing provisions of the Criminal Code (Title 13, Chapters 6 and 7) are reorganized. Statutes referring to classification of offenses are placed in Chapter 6 and statutes referring to sentencing are placed in Chapter 7. Sentencing statutes are set out in a logical sequence beginning with §13-701.

Related sentencing provisions are grouped in the same statute and unrelated provisions are grouped in separate statutes. Sentencing provisions that require a mathematical deviation from a stated sentence are replaced with a specific sentence set forth in a chart. Virtually all sentences are now written in chart form. Definitions common to multiple statutes in Title 13 are placed in one section (§13-105).

The term, “dangerous offense” is defined. Dangerous offenses and prior offenses are separated in placed in separate statutes. Multiple offenses not committed on the same occasion and exceptional aggravating and mitigating terms (now called aggravated and mitigated) are moved to the same statute as the minimum presumptive and maximum sentences for the particular series of offenses. All misdemeanor sentencing provisions are combined into one statue. Death penalty provisions are combined into one chapter.

Many of the sentencing statutes are renumbered and moved in order to achieve a logical sequence.
There are no substantive or philosophical changes to the sentencing code, with the exception of three minimum or maximum sentences that are rounded.

Statutes Impacted: A.R.S. 8-201, 8-203.01, 8-321, 8-341, 8-348, 8-350, 11-361, 11-459, 12-2703, 13-105, 13-107, 13-501, 13-502, 13-607, 13-610, 13-701,13-702, 13-705, 13-706, 13-707,13-708, 13-709, 13-710, 13-751, 13-752, 13-752, 13-755, 13-901.01, 13-902, 13-905, 13-906, 13-909, 13-910, 13-912.01, 13-921, 13-1104, 13-1105, 13-1204, 13-1207, 13-1212, 13-1304, 13-1307, 13-1404, 13-1405, 13-1406, 13-1410, 13-1411, 13-1414, 13-1417, 13-1423, 13-2308.01, 13-2312, 13-2411, 13-3107, 13-3113, 13-3206, 13-3212, 13-3407, 13-3407.01, 13-3408, 13-3409, 13-3411, 13-3419, 13-3422, 13-3552, 13-3553, 13-3554, 13-3560, 13-3561, 13-3601, 13-3623, 13-3716, 13-3727, 13-3821, 13-3824, 13-3828, 13-3994,13-4032, 13-4501, 13-4511, 13-4515, 15-341, 15-512, 15-550, 20-448, 25-411, 31-281, 31-403, 31-412, 41-1604.08, 41-1604.10, 41-1604.11, 41-1604.13, 41-1604.14, 41-1604.15, 41-1604.16, 41-1609.05, 41-1758.03, 41-1967.01, 41-2814
Statutes Renumbered: A.R.S. §13-604.01, 13-604.02, 13-604.04, 13-609, 13-703, 13-703.01, 13-703.02, 13-703.03, 13-703.04, 13-703.05, 13-704, 13-705, 13-706, 13-708, 13-709 , 13-713, 13-3560,
Statutes Enacted: A.R.S. §13-604, 13-703, 13-704, 13-709.01, 13-709.02, 13-709.03, 13-709.04;
Statutes Repealed: A.R.S. §13-119, 13-604, 13-604.01, 13-604.03, 13-702.01, 13-702.02, 13-711, 13-712, 13-3821

Court Impact: Courts should be aware of the effect of this bill that reorganizes criminal sentencing provisions in Title 13 (Chapters 6 and 7). The bill moves the Sex Offender Monitoring Fund from 13-119 to 13-3121(Q). A technical correction designates 13-3821(J) as a class 6 felony for failure to register. The changes require courts to update their automation system.

Back to Top

Chapter 305

HB2485

Effective Date
General

Item of interest to:
Justice Court:
Court Administrator
Justice of the Peace
Clerk
Municipal Court:
Court Administrator
Judge/Magistrate
Clerk
Administrative Office of the Courts

UNLAWFUL PUBLIC SALE OF ANIMALS
Rep. Jim Weiers

In a county with a population greater than 800,000, the public sale of animals is unlawful if the sale takes place on any of the following:

  • A public highway, street or park or any public property adjacent to a public highway, street or park.
  • Any commercial private property without the express consent of the owner or lessee of the property.

Exceptions are made for retail sales at pet stores, sales by charitable nonprofits organizations, and any rodeo, auction market, county fair, stock show or other sanctioned livestock exhibit event. “Animal” and “pet store” are defined. Violators are subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $50.

Statute Created: A.R.S. §44-1799.71

Court Impact: Allows for a civil penalty for the public sale of animals not to exceed $50 for a violation in a county with a population greater than 800,000.

Back to Top

Back to Top

   
22 August 2007 © Arizona Supreme Court. All Rights Reserved Top of Page
y