Ariz. Rev. Stat. » Title 13
Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-108 (2026)

Territorial applicability

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

A. This state has jurisdiction over an offense that a person commits by his own conduct or the conduct of another for which such person is legally accountable if:

1. Conduct constituting any element of the offense or a result of such conduct occurs within this state; or

2. The conduct outside this state constitutes an attempt or conspiracy to commit an offense within this state and an act in furtherance of the attempt or conspiracy occurs within this state; or

3. The conduct within this state constitutes an attempt, solicitation, conspiracy or facilitation to commit or establishes criminal accountability for the commission of an offense in another jurisdiction that is also an offense under the law of this state; or

4. The offense consists of an omission to perform a duty imposed by the law of this state regardless of the location of the defendant at the time of the offense; or

5. The offense is a violation of a statute of this state that prohibits conduct outside the state.

B. When the offense involves a homicide, either the death of the victim or the bodily impact causing death constitutes a result within the meaning of subsection A, paragraph 1. If the body of a homicide victim is found in this state it is presumed that the result occurred in this state.

C. This state includes the land and water and the air space above the land and water.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 60 cases (9 in the last 5 years), 1965–2026 · leading case: State v. Willoughby, 892 P.2d 1319 (Ariz. 1995).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Willoughby, 892 P.2d 1319 (Ariz. 1995). · cites it 76× “The trial court asserted jurisdiction under A.R.S. § 13-108, [1] which gives Arizona extra-territorial jurisdiction under certain conditions, including cases in which a defendant commits an element of an offense within the state.”
State v. Flores, 188 P.3d 706 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 11× “Because the text of § 13-108 may fairly be construed to give Arizona jurisdiction “over crimes having any ‘contact’ with this state,” see 1 Rudolf J. Gerber, Criminal Law Of Arizona 108-1 (2d ed.”
Lay v. Nelson In & For Cnty. Of Yuma, 436 P.3d 496 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 12× “¶11 Although case authority interpreting § 22-301 is scant, the legislature used similar language in A.R.S. § 13-108 (2019) to describe the jurisdiction of the Arizona court system to try criminal offenses.”
State v. Yegan, 221 P.3d 1027 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 10× “The conduct outside this state constitutes an attempt or conspiracy to commit an offense within this state and an act in furtherance of the attempt or conspiracy occurs within this state[.”
State v. Miller, 755 P.2d 434 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 14× “The state asserts that Arizona has jurisdiction to prosecute Miller under A.R.S. § 13-108. That statute, in pertinent part, reads as follows: A.”
State v. Poland, 645 P.2d 784 (Ariz. 1982). · cites it 2× “Jurisdiction of the Arizona courts in criminal cases extends to crimes when any element has been committed in the State of Arizona. “A. This state has jurisdiction over an offense that a person commits by his own conduct or the conduct of another for which such person is legally…”
State v. Jackson, 90 P.3d 793 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 2× “Second, the statute at issue in Willoughby , A.R.S. § 13-108(A), is clearly a jurisdiction statute (governing “[t]his statefs] .”
State v. Hughes, 426 P.2d 386 (Ariz. 1967). · cites it 4× “" A.R.S. § 13-108. Therefore it was incumbent upon the state under the circumstances of this case, to prove the intent, since it could reasonably anticipate that the defendant would claim the automobile crash in which Sherri Lynn was injured was the result of an accident, (which…”
United States v. Wilfredo Lopez, 4 F.4th 706 (9th Cir. 2021). “” Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 13-108 (A)(1). 28 Hawaii authorizes prosecution for “conduct or the result [of conduct] which is an element of the offense [if it] occurs within [the] State.”
State v. Fischer, 199 P.3d 663 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 13-108(A) (2001). When jurisdictional facts are in dispute, they must be proven by the State beyond a reasonable doubt.”
State v. Chan, 935 P.2d 850 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 9× “The conduct outside this state constitutes an attempt or conspiracy to commit an offense within this state and an act in furtherance of the attempt or conspiracy occurs within this state; ____ The trial court found a lack of jurisdiction, saying: Criminal jurisdiction of Arizona…”
State v. La Mountain, 611 P.2d 551 (Ariz. 1980). · cites it 2× “…rape, A.R.S. §§ 13-611(A), -614(A); lewd and lascivious acts, § 13-652; and attempted lewd and lascivious acts, §§ 13-108, -109, -110 and 13-652. [1] Defendant was sentenced to not less than thirty-five nor more than forty years for the rape; four to five years for the…”
Show all 60 citing cases →
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-108(1) — 1 case
State v. Silva (Ariz. Ct. App. 2017).
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-108(A) — 7 cases
State v. Willoughby, 892 P.2d 1319 (Ariz. 1995). “The trial court asserted jurisdiction under A.R.S. § 13-108, [1] which gives Arizona extra-territorial jurisdiction under certain conditions, including cases in which a defendant commits an element of an offense within the state.”
State v. Jackson, 90 P.3d 793 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2004). “Second, the statute at issue in Willoughby , A.R.S. § 13-108(A), is clearly a jurisdiction statute (governing “[t]his statefs] .”
State v. Fischer, 199 P.3d 663 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008). “A.R.S. § 13-108(A) (2001). When jurisdictional facts are in dispute, they must be proven by the State beyond a reasonable doubt.”
State v. Dudley, 581 S.E.2d 171 (S.C. Ct. App. 2003).
State Ex Rel. Goddard v. W. Union Fin. Servs. Inc., 166 P.3d 916 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2007).
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-108(A)(1) — 20 cases
State v. Willoughby, 892 P.2d 1319 (Ariz. 1995). “The trial court asserted jurisdiction under A.R.S. § 13-108, [1] which gives Arizona extra-territorial jurisdiction under certain conditions, including cases in which a defendant commits an element of an offense within the state.”
State v. Flores, 188 P.3d 706 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008). “Because the text of § 13-108 may fairly be construed to give Arizona jurisdiction “over crimes having any ‘contact’ with this state,” see 1 Rudolf J. Gerber, Criminal Law Of Arizona 108-1 (2d ed.”
State v. Poland, 645 P.2d 784 (Ariz. 1982). “Jurisdiction of the Arizona courts in criminal cases extends to crimes when any element has been committed in the State of Arizona. “A. This state has jurisdiction over an offense that a person commits by his own conduct or the conduct of another for which such person is legally…”
State v. Miller, 755 P.2d 434 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1988). “The state asserts that Arizona has jurisdiction to prosecute Miller under A.R.S. § 13-108. That statute, in pertinent part, reads as follows: A.”
State v. Yegan, 221 P.3d 1027 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2009). “The conduct outside this state constitutes an attempt or conspiracy to commit an offense within this state and an act in furtherance of the attempt or conspiracy occurs within this state[.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-108(A)(2) — 3 cases
State v. Chan, 935 P.2d 850 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1996). “The conduct outside this state constitutes an attempt or conspiracy to commit an offense within this state and an act in furtherance of the attempt or conspiracy occurs within this state; ____ The trial court found a lack of jurisdiction, saying: Criminal jurisdiction of Arizona…”
State v. Miller, 755 P.2d 434 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1988). “The state asserts that Arizona has jurisdiction to prosecute Miller under A.R.S. § 13-108. That statute, in pertinent part, reads as follows: A.”
State v. Mercer (Ariz. Ct. App. 2015).
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-108(A)(3) — 1 case
State v. Willoughby, 892 P.2d 1319 (Ariz. 1995). “The trial court asserted jurisdiction under A.R.S. § 13-108, [1] which gives Arizona extra-territorial jurisdiction under certain conditions, including cases in which a defendant commits an element of an offense within the state.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-108(A)(4) — 1 case
State v. Miller, 755 P.2d 434 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1988). “The state asserts that Arizona has jurisdiction to prosecute Miller under A.R.S. § 13-108. That statute, in pertinent part, reads as follows: A.”
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.