Code of Alabama
Ala. Code § 13A-7-41 (2026)
Arson in the First Degree. (Amended by Act 2026-515)
✓ official Alabama Legislature (ALISON) text, current July 2026
AMENDED BY ACT 2026-515, EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 1, 2026. SEE ACT FOR REVISED LANGUAGE.
(a) A person commits the crime of arson in the first degree if he intentionally damages a building by starting or maintaining a fire or causing an explosion, and when:
(1) Another person is present in such building at the time, and
(2) The actor knows that fact, or the circumstances are such as to render the presence of a person therein a reasonable possibility.
(b) Arson in the first degree is a Class A felony.
(Acts 1977, No. 607, p. 812, §2805.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 19
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1983–2026 · leading case: Coon v. State, 494 So. 2d 184 (Ala. Crim. App. 1986).
Coon v. State, 494 So. 2d 184 (Ala. Crim. App. 1986). “This appeal follows a conviction for the offense of attempted arson in the second degree, in violation of § 13A-7-41, Code of Alabama (1975), and a sentence of fifteen years' imprisonment.”
Thomas v. State, 766 So. 2d 860 (Ala. Crim. App. 1998). “"Kenneth Glenn Thomas was charged in a four-count indictment with intentional murder [of 82-year-old Flossie McLemore] during the course of a burglary (in violation of § 13A-5-40(a)(4), Code of Alabama 1975), arson in the first degree (in violation of § 13A-7-41, Code of Alabama…”
Scott v. State, 163 So. 3d 389 (Ala. Crim. App. 2012). “” Section 13A-7-41, Ala.Code 1975, defines the crime of arson in the first degree: “(a) A person commits the crime of arson in the first degree if he intentionally damages a building by starting or maintaining a fire or causing an explosion, and when: *455 “(1) Another person is…”
Harlin Phillip Seritt, Jr. v. State of Alabama, 731 F.2d 728 (11th Cir. 1984). “Ala.Code § 13A-7-41 (1982). 9 . Ala.Code § 13A-8-41 (1982) provides: (a) A person commits the crime of robbery in the first degree if he violates section 13A-8-43 and he: (1) is armed with a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument; or (2) Causes serious physical injury to another.”
State v. Durant, 674 P.2d 638 (Utah 1983). “See also Ala. Code §§ 13A-7-41 to -43 (1982); Del.”
McMullin v. State, 442 So. 2d 155 (Ala. Crim. App. 1983). “Alabama Code Section 13A-7-41 (1975). Since *157 McMullin had two prior convictions for rape, he was sentenced as an habitual offender to life imprisonment.”
Miller v. State, 273 So. 3d 921 (Ala. Crim. App. 2018). “Specifically, the report alleged that Miller had: (1) committed the new offense of first-degree arson, 1 see § 13A-7-41, Ala. Code 1975; (2) committed the new offense of third-degree criminal trespassing, see § 13A-7-4, Ala.”
Newton v. State, 78 So. 3d 458 (Ala. Crim. App. 2009). “Newton was also convicted of first-degree arson, a violation of § 13A-7-41, Ala.Code 1975, and first-degree theft of property, a violation of § 13A-8-3(b), Ala.”
Tarvin v. State, 527 So. 2d 752 (Ala. Crim. App. 1986). “d in pertinent part the following: “JERRY LEVERNE TARVIN did knowingly and intentionally damage an occupied building, the property in the possession of Geneva Smith, by starting or maintaining a fire, knowing a person was in the building at that time, to-wit: Geneva Smith, or…”
Ex parte Christie Michelle Scott., 163 So. 3d 471 (Ala. 2014). “See §§ 13A-7-41 through -43, Ala. Code 1975. One of the capital offenses charged in this case is "[m]urder by the defendant during arson in the first or second degree committed by the defendant.”
C.L.M. v. State, 531 So. 2d 699 (Ala. Crim. App. 1988). “I The only issue raised by this appellant on appeal is that there was insufficient evidence presented at trial to support a finding of delinquency.”
R.L.A.C. v. State, 823 So. 2d 1288 (Ala. Crim. App. 2001). “Code 1975; of first-degree arson, a violation of § 13A-7-41, Ala.Code 1975; and of attempted murder, a violation of § 13A-6-2 and § 13A-4-2, Ala.”
— Ala. Code § 13A-7-41(a) — 1 case
C.L.M. v. State, 531 So. 2d 699 (Ala. Crim. App. 1988). “I The only issue raised by this appellant on appeal is that there was insufficient evidence presented at trial to support a finding of delinquency.”
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.