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

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-4131 (2026)

Discharge of prisoner

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

A. If no legal cause is shown for the imprisonment or restraint, or for continuation thereof, the party shall be discharged from custody or restraint.

B. If the time during which the party may be legally detained in custody has not expired and he is detained in custody by virtue of process issued by any court, judge or agency of the United States, in an action where such court, judge or agency has exclusive jurisdiction, or by virtue of the final judgment or decree of any court of competent jurisdiction, or of any process issued upon such judgment or decree, the person shall not be discharged.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1992–2023 · leading case: Findlay v. Lewis, 837 P.2d 145 (Ariz. 1992).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Findlay v. Lewis, 837 P.2d 145 (Ariz. 1992). · cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 13-4131(A). Findlay’s petition did not present a color-able claim for release—he sought a transfer to Utah.”
McDonald v. Thomas, 40 P.3d 819 (Ariz. 2002). · cites it 2× “See A.R.S. § 13-4131(A). ¶ 37 IT IS ORDERED, therefore, that relief is granted.”
Long v. Arizona Bd. of Pardons & Parole, 885 P.2d 178 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 2× “Proper Relief We turn to the State’s argument that the trial court exceeded its authority by ordering return to community release. We agree in two respects. First, the court erred by employing a Writ of Habeas Corpus in this case.”
Sims v. Ryan, 890 P.2d 625 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 13-4131; State v. Abbott, 103 Ariz.”
Lewis v. Superior Court (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 2× “hallenges his conviction is underscored by the claims in the petition that the state violated Lewis’ constitutional rights at trial, his request for an evidentiary hearing under the post-conviction statutes and Rule 32 of the Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure, and his plea for…”
State v. Sharp (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 2× “1995); A.R.S. § 13-4131; see also Ariz. R. Crim.”
State v. Finkel (Ariz. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 2× “1995) (citing Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-4131 (2015), and State v.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-4131(A) — 3 cases
Findlay v. Lewis, 837 P.2d 145 (Ariz. 1992). “A.R.S. § 13-4131(A). Findlay’s petition did not present a color-able claim for release—he sought a transfer to Utah.”
McDonald v. Thomas, 40 P.3d 819 (Ariz. 2002). “See A.R.S. § 13-4131(A). ¶ 37 IT IS ORDERED, therefore, that relief is granted.”
Lewis v. Superior Court (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023). “hallenges his conviction is underscored by the claims in the petition that the state violated Lewis’ constitutional rights at trial, his request for an evidentiary hearing under the post-conviction statutes and Rule 32 of the Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure, and his plea for…”
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.