Arizona Revised Statutes
Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-2926 (2026)
Abandonment or concealment of a dead body; classification
✓ text as last checked Oct. 2026 (this copy records no edition or section history)
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
AZ-LEGazleg.gov (official)
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
13-2926. Abandonment or concealment of a dead body; classification
A. It is unlawful for a person to knowingly move a dead human body or parts of a human body with the intent to abandon or conceal the dead human body or parts.
B. This section does not apply to the disposition, transportation or other handling of dead human remains for any purpose authorized under title 32, chapter 12, title 32, chapter 20, article 6 and title 36, chapters 3 and 7.
C. A person who violates this section is guilty of a class 5 felony.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2009–2024 · leading case: State v. Lockwood, 218 P.3d 1008 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2009).
State v. Lockwood, 218 P.3d 1008 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2009). “¶ 1 After a jury trial, Regina Lockwood was convicted of conspiring to conceal or abandon a human body in violation of A.R.S. § 13-2926. The trial court suspended imposition of sentence and placed her on three years’ probation.”
State v. Mitchell, No. 1 CA-CR 22-0521 (Ariz. Ct. App. Jan. 4, 2024). “¶5 Before trial, Mitchell stated in an affidavit that he scattered the body parts to “create an instant platform in order to warn the public and prevent a credible threat to the public safety from a nontransplant anatomical donation industry that serves a global clientele…”
State v. Jaramillo, 460 P.3d 321 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2020). “The court found Jaramillo’s family support as a mitigating factor and found the following aggravating factors: extensive criminal history, offenses committed for pecuniary gain, harm to the victim, and emotional harm to the victim’s family.”
State of Arizona v. Regina Marie Lockwood, No. 2 CA-CR 2008-0157 (Ariz. Ct. App. Sept. 24, 2009). “On appeal, Lockwood argues the fetal remains at issue in this case do not constitute a “dead human body” for purposes of the statute and, absent any evidence of a live birth, her conviction must be reversed.”
State v. Griffith, No. 1 CA-CR 14-0297 (Ariz. Ct. App. Aug. 20, 2015). “” A.R.S. § 13-2926(A). A person may be liable for either of these offenses as an accomplice if he or she aids another in planning or committing the offense or provides the means and opportunity for the other person to commit the offense.”
Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-2926(A): 5 cases
State v. Lockwood, 218 P.3d 1008 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2009). “¶ 1 After a jury trial, Regina Lockwood was convicted of conspiring to conceal or abandon a human body in violation of A.R.S. § 13-2926. The trial court suspended imposition of sentence and placed her on three years’ probation.”
State v. Jaramillo, 460 P.3d 321 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2020). “The court found Jaramillo’s family support as a mitigating factor and found the following aggravating factors: extensive criminal history, offenses committed for pecuniary gain, harm to the victim, and emotional harm to the victim’s family.”
State v. Mitchell, No. 1 CA-CR 22-0521 (Ariz. Ct. App. Jan. 4, 2024). “¶5 Before trial, Mitchell stated in an affidavit that he scattered the body parts to “create an instant platform in order to warn the public and prevent a credible threat to the public safety from a nontransplant anatomical donation industry that serves a global clientele…”
State v. Griffith, No. 1 CA-CR 14-0297 (Ariz. Ct. App. Aug. 20, 2015). “” A.R.S. § 13-2926(A). A person may be liable for either of these offenses as an accomplice if he or she aids another in planning or committing the offense or provides the means and opportunity for the other person to commit the offense.”
State of Arizona v. Regina Marie Lockwood, No. 2 CA-CR 2008-0157 (Ariz. Ct. App. Sept. 24, 2009). “On appeal, Lockwood argues the fetal remains at issue in this case do not constitute a “dead human body” for purposes of the statute and, absent any evidence of a live birth, her conviction must be reversed.”
Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-2926(B): 1 case
State v. Mitchell, No. 1 CA-CR 22-0521 (Ariz. Ct. App. Jan. 4, 2024). “¶5 Before trial, Mitchell stated in an affidavit that he scattered the body parts to “create an instant platform in order to warn the public and prevent a credible threat to the public safety from a nontransplant anatomical donation industry that serves a global clientele…”
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.