A. The board may require any county officer to make reports under oath on any matter connected with the duties of his office, and may require the officer to give such bonds or further bonds as may be necessary for the faithful performance of his respective duties. An officer who neglects or refuses to make the report, or to give the bond within ten days after being so required, may be removed from office by the board and the office declared vacant. The board may then fill the vacancy.
B. Every officer from whom an additional bond is required by the board may appeal from the order to the superior court, which shall determine and fix the amount of the bond. The appeal may be taken by filing with the board a notice of appeal, and thereupon the clerk shall certify all proceedings to the court.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
4
cases (
1 in the last 5 years), 2008–2025 · leading case:
Hounshell v. White, 199 P.3d 636 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008).
Hounshell v. White, 199 P.3d 636 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008).
· cites it 41× “2120 did not delete or amend § 11-253. As stated above, this statute permits a county board of supervisors, at its discretion, to “require any county officer .”
United States v. Cnty. of Maricopa, 889 F.3d 648 (9th Cir. 2018).
“” Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 11-251 (1). The board may also “require any county officer to make reports under oath on any matter connected with the duties of his office,” and may remove an officer who neglects or refuses to do so.”
Hounshell v. White, 202 P.3d 466 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008).
· cites it 2× “The legislature has also provided that a county board of supervisors may require a county officer to post a bond and that “an officer who neglects or refuses .”
Sanchez v. Maricopa Cnty., 572 P.3d 101 (Ariz. 2025).
· cites it 2× “In sum, the Arizona Constitution does not provide a board with any general authority to hire, fire, supervise, discipline, control, or prescribe duties for a sheriff.”
Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 11-253(A): 3 cases
Hounshell v. White, 199 P.3d 636 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008).
“2120 did not delete or amend § 11-253. As stated above, this statute permits a county board of supervisors, at its discretion, to “require any county officer .”
Hounshell v. White, 202 P.3d 466 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008).
“The legislature has also provided that a county board of supervisors may require a county officer to post a bond and that “an officer who neglects or refuses .”
Sanchez v. Maricopa Cnty., 572 P.3d 101 (Ariz. 2025).
“In sum, the Arizona Constitution does not provide a board with any general authority to hire, fire, supervise, discipline, control, or prescribe duties for a sheriff.”
Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 11-253(B): 1 case
Hounshell v. White, 199 P.3d 636 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008).
“2120 did not delete or amend § 11-253. As stated above, this statute permits a county board of supervisors, at its discretion, to “require any county officer .”
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.