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

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-1418 (2026)

Sexual misconduct; behavioral health professionals; classification

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

A. A behavioral health professional licensed pursuant to title 32, chapter 33 or a psychiatrist or psychologist licensed pursuant to title 32, chapter 13, 17 or 19.1 commits sexual misconduct by intentionally or knowingly engaging in sexual intercourse with a client who is currently under the care or supervision of the licensed behavioral health professional, psychiatrist or psychologist.

B. Sexual misconduct by a licensed behavioral health professional, psychiatrist or psychologist is a class 6 felony.

C. This section does not apply to any act of sexual conduct that occurs between a licensed behavioral health professional, psychiatrist or psychologist and a client after the client has completed a course of treatment or if the client is not under the care of the licensed behavioral health professional, psychiatrist or psychologist.

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 20 cases, 1958–2012 · leading case: State v. Rivera, 381 P.2d 584 (Ariz. 1963).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Rivera, 381 P.2d 584 (Ariz. 1963). · cites it 6× “A.R.S. § 13-1418 requires that a person arrested without a warrant be taken before a magistrate without unnecessary delay.”
State v. Aguilar, 97 P.3d 865 (Ariz. 2004). “§ 13-1418 (Supp.2003); commercial sexual exploitation of a minor, id.”
Application of Buccheri, 431 P.2d 91 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1967). · cites it 4× “2d 583 ) violation of the counterpart statute, A.R.S. § 13-1418, pertaining to arrest without a warrant, for a period of 79 days, does not invalidate a conviction.”
Erdman v. Superior Court of Maricopa Cnty., 433 P.2d 972 (Ariz. 1967). · cites it 5× “The court had many trial settings which were vacated, and, finally, on October 26, 1966, defendant filed a written motion to dismiss on the ground that the court had acquired no jurisdiction because of non-compliance with Criminal Rule 1, and A.”
Thierfelder v. Wolfert, 52 A.3d 1251 (Pa. 2012). “, Ariz.Rev.Stat. § 13-1418; Colo.Rev.Stat. § 18-3-405.”
In re MH 2006-002044, 170 P.3d 280 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “§ 13-3898 (2001), then A.R.S. § 13-1418, the defendant, arrested without a warrant, was supposed to have been brought before a magistrate “without unnecessary delay.”
State v. White, 492 P.2d 1217 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1972). · cites it 3× “First, that he was not taken before a magistrate without unnecessary delay (four days after his arrest) as required by A.R.S. § 13-1418; 1 and second, that his preliminary examination or hearing was not held until *281 August 5, 1969, a period of eight days subsequent to his…”
State v. Ramos, 463 P.2d 91 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1969). · cites it 2× “Lastly, defendant argues that his eleven-hours’ detention violated his rights under A.R.S. § 13-1418 which mandates taking an arrestee before a magistrate without “unnecessary delay” In State v.”
State v. Superior Court, 414 P.2d 738 (Ariz. 1966). · cites it 3× “A.R.S. § 13-1418 provides: “An officer who has arrested a person without a warrant shall without unnecessary delay take the person arrested before the nearest or most accessible magistrate in the county in which the arrest occurs, and shall make before the magistrate a…”
State ex rel. Corbin v. Superior Court, 413 P.2d 264 (Ariz. 1966). · cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 13-1418 provides that the officer who has made the arrest shall without unnecessary delay take the person arrested before the nearest or most accessible magistrate in the county in which the arrest occurs, and shall make the complaint before that magistrate; however, in…”
State v. Maldonado, 373 P.2d 583 (Ariz. 1962). “Section 13-1418 of the Arizona Criminal Code enjoins an officer who has arrested a person without a warrant to “ * * * take the person arrested before the nearest or most accessible magistrate in the county in which the arrest occurs * * * " “ * * * without unnecessary delay * *…”
Dotseth v. Just. Court, Tucson, Precinct No. One, 427 P.2d 558 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1967). · cites it 4× “2d 583 (1962), holding that, in the absence of a showing that the accused was prejudiced in his defense, the violation of a statute requiring that an accused be brought before a magistrate “ * * * without unnecessary delay * * A.R.S. § 13-1418, does not invalidate a conviction.”
Show all 20 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.