Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-1506 (2026)

Burglary in the third degree; 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 person commits burglary in the third degree by:

1. Entering or remaining unlawfully in or on a nonresidential structure or in a fenced commercial or residential yard with the intent to commit any theft or any felony therein.

2. Making entry into any part of a motor vehicle by means of a manipulation key or master key, with the intent to commit any theft or felony in the motor vehicle.

B. Burglary in the third degree is a class 4 felony.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 99 cases (12 in the last 5 years), 1979–2026 · leading case: State v. Hamblin, 176 P.3d 49 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

State v. Hamblin, 176 P.3d 49 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 24× “In this opinion, we address Hamblin’s argument that his actions did not constitute burglary under A.R.S. § 13-1506. In a separate, simultaneously filed memorandum decision, we address other issues that do not meet the criteria for publication and conclude they, like the claim we…”

State v. Malloy, 639 P.2d 315 (Ariz. 1981). · cites it 10× “” A.R.S. § 13-1506. The crime of burglary does not necessarily involve an element of deceit or falsification and, consequently, is not admissible under Rule 609(a)(2).”

State v. Zinsmeyer, 218 P.3d 1069 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 10× “See §§ 13-1506,13-1507. ¶ 32 We conclude it would be patently unreasonable to construe the word “premises” in § 13-1501(2) as an unexpressed limitation on the word “vehicle” in § 13-1501(12).”

United States v. Michael Herrold, 883 F.3d 517 (5th Cir. 2018). · cites it 2× “gov/data/datasets/2016/demo/popest/counties-total.html (last updated July 25, 2017). See W.”

State of Arizona v. Anthony Lewis, 340 P.3d 415 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 6× “§§ 13-1502 through 13-1504 (trespass); AR.S. §§ 13-1506 through 13-1508 (burglary).”

State v. Hinden, 233 P.3d 621 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 5× “§§ 13-1502 through 13-1504 (trespass); A.R.S. §§ 13-1506 through 13-1508 (burglary).”

State of Arizona v. Cynthia D. Johnson, 156 P.3d 445 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 7× “The state notes it "could (and should)” have alleged as predicate offenses burglary under A.R.S. §§ 13-1506, 13-1507, or 13-1508, as well as kidnapping under A.”

State of Arizona v. Joann Bon, 338 P.3d 989 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 5× “Our legislature has provided several definitions to guide our interpretation of § 13-1506. See Petrak, 198 Ariz. 260, ¶ 10 , 8 P.”

State v. Kozan, 706 P.2d 753 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 10× “A jury convicted appellee of two counts of third-degree burglary in violation of A.R.S. § 13-1506. Appellee’s motion for new trial was granted because he had been denied a jury instruction that second-degree criminal trespass is a lesser-included offense of burglary in the third…”

State v. Fontes, 986 P.2d 897 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 2× “Under these circumstances, the off-duty, privately employed deputy was acting in vindication of public rights and justice.”

State v. Cotten, 263 P.3d 654 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 4× “AR.S. §§ 13-1506 (2009), -1507 (2009). “ ‘Structure’ means any vending machine or any building, object, vehicle, railroad car or place with sides and a floor that is separately securable from any other structure attached to it and that is used for lodging, business,…”

State of Arizona v. Edward James Rose, 297 P.3d 906 (Ariz. 2013). · cites it 2× “Mitigating circumstances ¶ 77 In the penalty phase, the defendant is entitled to present any mitigating circumstances that the jury may consider in determining the appropriate sentence.”

Show all 99 citing cases →

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-1506(A) — 9 cases

State v. Brown, 936 P.2d 181 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1997).

State v. Aro, 937 P.2d 711 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1997).

State of Arizona v. Joann Bon, 338 P.3d 989 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014). “Our legislature has provided several definitions to guide our interpretation of § 13-1506. See Petrak, 198 Ariz. 260, ¶ 10 , 8 P.”

State v. Belcher, 776 P.2d 811 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1989).

State v. Rogowski, 634 P.2d 387 (Ariz. 1981).

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-1506(A)(1) — 28 cases

State v. Zinsmeyer, 218 P.3d 1069 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2009). “See §§ 13-1506,13-1507. ¶ 32 We conclude it would be patently unreasonable to construe the word “premises” in § 13-1501(2) as an unexpressed limitation on the word “vehicle” in § 13-1501(12).”

State v. Hinden, 233 P.3d 621 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2010). “§§ 13-1502 through 13-1504 (trespass); A.R.S. §§ 13-1506 through 13-1508 (burglary).”

State of Arizona v. Anthony Lewis, 340 P.3d 415 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014). “§§ 13-1502 through 13-1504 (trespass); AR.S. §§ 13-1506 through 13-1508 (burglary).”

State v. Gill, 333 P.3d 36 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014).

State v. Hamblin, 176 P.3d 49 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008). “In this opinion, we address Hamblin’s argument that his actions did not constitute burglary under A.R.S. § 13-1506. In a separate, simultaneously filed memorandum decision, we address other issues that do not meet the criteria for publication and conclude they, like the claim we…”

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-1506(A)(2) — 3 cases

State of Arizona v. Lance Christian Hamblin (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008).

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-1506(B) — 2 cases

State v. Winans, 605 P.2d 904 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1979).

State v. Bailey (Ariz. Ct. App. 2017).

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.