Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-251 (2026)

Adult probation officers and support staff; appointment; qualifications

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section AZ-LEGazleg.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A. The presiding judge of the superior court in each county shall appoint a chief adult probation officer who shall serve at the pleasure of the presiding judge. Such chief adult probation officer, with the approval of the presiding judge of the superior court, shall appoint such deputy adult probation officers and support staff as are necessary to provide presentence investigations and supervision services to the court. Presentence investigations and probation services may be provided to the justice courts in each county for persons who are convicted of violating section 28-1381 or 28-1382 or title 13, chapter 14, 35.1 or 36 and who are placed on supervised probation by the court. Presentence investigations and supervised probation services may be provided by a county probation office to a municipal court through an intergovernmental agreement entered into by the respective county and municipality. On approval of the presiding judge and in accordance with policies and procedures developed by the supreme court, the presiding judge of the superior court may direct that presentence investigations and supervised probation services be provided for other persons if a risk of violence exists or if it would be in the best interest of justice. Those deputy adult probation officers engaged in case supervision shall supervise no more than an average of sixty-five adults who reside in the county on probation to the court. Such deputy adult probation officers shall hold office under rules and procedures established by the supreme court.

B. Each adult probation officer appointed pursuant to subsection A of this section shall give bond in the principal amount to be fixed by the court and approved by the judge making the appointment, conditioned upon the faithful performance by such officer of the officer's official duties and the payment of all monies coming into the officer's possession as such officer to the person, officer or body entitled to receive the monies. Any adult probation officer covered by a blanket faithful performance bond payable to the county or covered by state risk management shall be deemed to be in compliance with this section.

C. Probation department personnel shall qualify under minimum standards of experience and education established by the supreme court. Such standards may differ for counties of less than three hundred thousand persons from counties with three hundred thousand persons or more. Notwithstanding section 12-265, any additional salary costs that might be required as a result of the adoption of minimum salary standards by the supreme court may be paid by funds made available to the probation department pursuant to sections 12-267 and 12-268 or by the supreme court.

D. Presently appointed adult probation officers who qualify under subsection C of this section shall be retained in their position as long as they are qualified.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 9 cases, 1975–2016 · leading case: Broomfield v. Maricopa Cnty., 544 P.2d 1080 (Ariz. 1975).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Broomfield v. Maricopa Cnty., 544 P.2d 1080 (Ariz. 1975). · cites it 16× “The appointment was made pursuant to A.R.S. § 12-251 on August 6, 1975, by the chief adult probation officer of the Superior Court of Maricopa County.”

State v. Panos, 366 P.3d 1006 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 6× “” AR.S. § 12-251(A). The officers and other staff have extensive duties including the provision of services to and supervision of those convicted and placed on probation.”

State v. Hill, 848 P.2d 1375 (Ariz. 1993). · cites it 2× “See A.R.S. § 12-251(A). The deputy officers and staff provide presentence investigations for use by the sentencing judge.”

Adams v. State, 916 P.2d 1156 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 12-251(A). The deputy officers hold office "under rules and procedures established by the supreme court.”

State v. Pima Cnty. Adult Prob. Dep't, 708 P.2d 1337 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 2× “The state next contends that the trial court abused its discretion when it decided as a matter of law that the probation department is part of the judicial department of the state.”

Smith v. State, Dep't of Corr., 872 P.2d 1218 (Alaska 1994). “§ 3602 (1985); Ariz.Rev.Stat.Ann. § 12-251 (1992) (probation officers part of judicial branch); Cal.”

Acevedo v. Pima Cnty. Adult Prob. Dep't, 690 P.2d 79 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 2× “The chief adult probation officer, with the approval of the presiding judge of the superior court, appoints deputy probation officers and support staff to provide presentence investigations and supervision services to the superior court.”

State v. Brooks, 753 P.2d 1185 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1988). “§ 12-251(A). The intensive probation program was created by statute.”

State v. Mayer, 834 P.2d 165 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 2× “See generally A.R.S. §§ 12-251 through 12-254; State v.”

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-251(A) — 4 cases

State v. Panos, 366 P.3d 1006 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016). “” AR.S. § 12-251(A). The officers and other staff have extensive duties including the provision of services to and supervision of those convicted and placed on probation.”

State v. Hill, 848 P.2d 1375 (Ariz. 1993). “See A.R.S. § 12-251(A). The deputy officers and staff provide presentence investigations for use by the sentencing judge.”

Adams v. State, 916 P.2d 1156 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1995). “A.R.S. § 12-251(A). The deputy officers hold office "under rules and procedures established by the supreme court.”

State v. Brooks, 753 P.2d 1185 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1988). “§ 12-251(A). The intensive probation program was created by statute.”

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.