Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-4014 (2026)

Fees for expert witnesses in sanity hearing; fees of physician examining defendant alleging pregnancy as cause for not pronouncing sentence

✓ current as of May 2026

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

A. When expert witnesses are appointed by the court in the conduct of a sanity hearing before or during the trial of a criminal action, or prior to pronouncing sentence upon a person convicted of crime, they shall be allowed such fees as the court in its discretion deems reasonable, having regard to the services performed by the witnesses. The fees so allowed shall be paid by the county where the indictment was found or the information filed.

B. Physicians appointed by the court to examine a defendant who alleges pregnancy as a cause for not pronouncing sentence shall be allowed fees the court deems reasonable. Such fees shall be paid by the county in which the indictment was found or the information filed.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 1984–2001 · leading case: Amaya-Ruiz v. Stewart, 136 F. Supp. 2d 1014 (D. Ariz. 2001).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Amaya-Ruiz v. Stewart, 136 F. Supp. 2d 1014 (D. Ariz. 2001). · cites it 2× “Compare also A.R.S. § 13-4014(A) (providing for payment of fees to experts appointed by the court "in the conduct of a sanity hearing before or during the trial of criminal action, or prior to pronouncing sentence”), with A.”

City of Phoenix v. Superior Court, 677 P.2d 1288 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 2× “We believe by this statute the legislature intended to allow the county to recover the costs of a competency hearing from the city when the defendant is a city prisoner.”

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-4014(A) — 2 cases

Amaya-Ruiz v. Stewart, 136 F. Supp. 2d 1014 (D. Ariz. 2001). “Compare also A.R.S. § 13-4014(A) (providing for payment of fees to experts appointed by the court "in the conduct of a sanity hearing before or during the trial of criminal action, or prior to pronouncing sentence”), with A.”

City of Phoenix v. Superior Court, 677 P.2d 1288 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1984). “We believe by this statute the legislature intended to allow the county to recover the costs of a competency hearing from the city when the defendant is a city prisoner.”

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.