Ariz. Rev. Stat. » Title 1
Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 1-246 (2026)

Penalty altered by subsequent law; effect

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section AZ-LEGazleg.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

When the penalty for an offense is prescribed by one law and altered by a subsequent law, the penalty of such second law shall not be inflicted for a breach of the law committed before the second took effect, but the offender shall be punished under the law in force when the offense was committed.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 59 cases (9 in the last 5 years), 1963–2026 · leading case: State v. Atwood, 832 P.2d 593 (Ariz. 1992).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Atwood, 832 P.2d 593 (Ariz. 1992). · cites it 4× “See A.R.S. § 1-246 ("[O]ffender[s] shall be punished under the law in force when the *648 offense was committed.”
O'BRIEN v. Escher, 65 P.3d 107 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 7× “Additionally, A.R.S. § 1-246 provides: When the penalty for an offense is prescribed by one law and altered by a subsequent law, the penalty of such second law shall not be inflicted for a breach of the law committed before the second took effect, but the offender shall be…”
State v. Fell, 97 P.3d 902 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 4× “A.R.S. § 1-246; see also O’Brien v. Escher, 204 Ariz.”
State of Arizona v. Stephen Vincent Haverstick, 318 P.3d 877 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 6× “S. § 13-3821(Q) and a $500 assessment to the “Forensic Assessment Fund” pursuant to A.”
State v. Pandeli, 65 P.3d 950 (Ariz. 2003). · cites it 4× “A.R.S. § 1-246 (2002); State v. Newton, 200 Ariz.”
Baker v. Superior Court for Maricopa Cty., 947 P.2d 910 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 8× “section 1-246 (1995), which governs generally the applicability of new or amended sentencing statutes.”
State v. Hamilton, 868 P.2d 986 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 4× “A.R.S. §§ 1-246 and -247. See also A.R.S.”
State v. Sweet, 693 P.2d 921 (Ariz. 1985). · cites it 2× “In order to determine whether the original version applied only to prior felony convictions or to all convictions we must look to the principles of statutory construction.”
State v. Jensen, 970 P.2d 937 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 4× “” A.R.S. § 1-246; see also State v. Vineyard, 96 Ariz.”
United States v. United States Coin & Currency, 401 U.S. 715 (1971). · cites it 2× “021 (1962); Arizona: Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. §§ 1-246 , 1-247 (1956); see also id.”
State v. Schackart, 947 P.2d 315 (Ariz. 1997). · cites it 2× “We are unable to see the logic in this position.”
State v. Gonzales, 687 P.2d 1267 (Ariz. 1984). · cites it 4× “A.R.S. § 1-246 provides: When the penalty for an offense is prescribed by one law and altered by a subsequent law, the penalty of such second law shall not be inflicted for a breach of the law committed before the second took effect, but the offender shall be punished under the…”
Show all 59 citing cases →
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.