13-4442. Use of a facility dog in court proceedings; definition
A. The court shall allow a victim who is under eighteen years of age to have a facility dog, if available, accompany the victim while testifying in court. A party seeking the use of a facility dog must file a notice with the court that includes the certification of the facility dog, the name of the person or entity who certified the dog and evidence that the facility dog is insured.
B. The court may allow a victim who is eighteen years of age or more or a witness to use a facility dog.
C. To ensure that the presence of a facility dog assisting a victim or a witness does not influence the jury or is not a reflection on the truthfulness of any testimony that is offered by the victim or witness, the court shall instruct the jury on the role of the facility dog and that the facility dog is a trained animal.
D. For the purposes of this section, "facility dog" means a dog that is a graduate of an assistance dog organization that is a member of an organization or entity whose main purpose is to improve the areas of training, placement and utilization of assistance dogs, staff and volunteer education and to establish and promote standards of excellence in all areas of assistance dog acquisition, training and partnership.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
5
cases (
2 in the last 5 years), 2017–2025 · leading case:
State v. Millis, 391 P.3d 1225 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2017).
State v. Millis, 391 P.3d 1225 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2017).
· cites it 6× “3d 1192, ¶ 1 (2013) (“comfort animal" or "facility dog”), we use the term "facility dog” in this opinion because that is the term our legislature elected to use in a newly enacted statute on the subject, see A.R.S. § 13-4442. . See Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.”
State v. Riepe, No. 1 CA-CR 19-0555 (Ariz. Ct. App. Sept. 8, 2020).
· cites it 18× “The State asserted that the victim, now 18 years old, would have less “anxiety and stress” while 1 Chief Judge Peter B. Swann replaces the Honorable Kenton D.”
State of Arizona v. Hon. Browning, 542 P.3d 255 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023).
· cites it 14× “, adding “the right to the assistance of a facility dog when testifying as provided in A.R.S. § 13-4442 to the list of enumerated victims’ rights.”
State of Arizona v. Adriel Guevara-Enriquez, 576 P.3d 122 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2025).
· cites it 5× “To prevail on a facial challenge, Guevara-Enriquez must demonstrate there are no circumstances under which the statute could be found valid. State v. Wein, 244 Ariz.”
State v. Gray, No. 1 CA-CR 18-0330 (Ariz. Ct. App. Nov. 19, 2019).
· cites it 2× “¶10 Finally, the superior court properly denied Gray’s request for a mistrial based on Beth’s unsolicited testimony regarding Gray’s offers to stop the abuse from the time Beth was “very young” and ten years old.”
Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-4442(A): 3 cases
State of Arizona v. Hon. Browning, 542 P.3d 255 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023).
“, adding “the right to the assistance of a facility dog when testifying as provided in A.R.S. § 13-4442 to the list of enumerated victims’ rights.”
State v. Riepe, No. 1 CA-CR 19-0555 (Ariz. Ct. App. Sept. 8, 2020).
“The State asserted that the victim, now 18 years old, would have less “anxiety and stress” while 1 Chief Judge Peter B. Swann replaces the Honorable Kenton D.”
State v. Gray, No. 1 CA-CR 18-0330 (Ariz. Ct. App. Nov. 19, 2019).
“¶10 Finally, the superior court properly denied Gray’s request for a mistrial based on Beth’s unsolicited testimony regarding Gray’s offers to stop the abuse from the time Beth was “very young” and ten years old.”
Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-4442(B): 2 cases
State v. Millis, 391 P.3d 1225 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2017).
“3d 1192, ¶ 1 (2013) (“comfort animal" or "facility dog”), we use the term "facility dog” in this opinion because that is the term our legislature elected to use in a newly enacted statute on the subject, see A.R.S. § 13-4442. . See Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.”
State of Arizona v. Hon. Browning, 542 P.3d 255 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023).
“, adding “the right to the assistance of a facility dog when testifying as provided in A.R.S. § 13-4442 to the list of enumerated victims’ rights.”
Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-4442(C): 3 cases
State v. Millis, 391 P.3d 1225 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2017).
“3d 1192, ¶ 1 (2013) (“comfort animal" or "facility dog”), we use the term "facility dog” in this opinion because that is the term our legislature elected to use in a newly enacted statute on the subject, see A.R.S. § 13-4442. . See Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.”
State v. Riepe, No. 1 CA-CR 19-0555 (Ariz. Ct. App. Sept. 8, 2020).
“The State asserted that the victim, now 18 years old, would have less “anxiety and stress” while 1 Chief Judge Peter B. Swann replaces the Honorable Kenton D.”
State of Arizona v. Hon. Browning, 542 P.3d 255 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023).
“, adding “the right to the assistance of a facility dog when testifying as provided in A.R.S. § 13-4442 to the list of enumerated victims’ rights.”
Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-4442(D): 1 case
State of Arizona v. Hon. Browning, 542 P.3d 255 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023).
“, adding “the right to the assistance of a facility dog when testifying as provided in A.R.S. § 13-4442 to the list of enumerated victims’ rights.”
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.