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

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-606 (2026)

Civil commitment after imposition of sentence

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

A. If, after imposition of sentence authorized by section 13-603 and on the basis of the report and recommendations submitted to the court under subsection B of section 13-605, the court believes that the defendant discloses symptoms of mental disorder, the court may proceed as provided in chapter 5 of title 36.

B. After termination of the commitment in subsection A of this section, the defendant shall be returned to the court for release or to serve the unexpired term imposed as authorized by section 13-603. The period of confinement pursuant to the civil commitment shall be credited to the sentence imposed.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 1988–2005 · leading case: State v. Bomar, 19 P.3d 613 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2001).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Bomar, 19 P.3d 613 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 4× “section 13-606 (1989) may undergo treatment and then be returned to serve the balance of sentence in prison.”
State v. Cofield, 107 P.3d 930 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 2× “§ 13-605(D) (2001) (mandating credit for presentence diagnostic commitment of defendant in custody of DOC to aid in sentencing); A.R.S. § 13-606(B) (2001) (mandating credit for civil commitment during prison term); A.”
State v. Reynolds, 823 P.2d 681 (Ariz. 1992). “…those circumstances are. See, e.g., § 13-605(D) (mandates credit for periods of commitment for diagnostic purposes); § 13-606(B) (mandates credit for periods of civil commitment); § 13-709(C) (mandates credit at resentencing for time served under a vacated sentence); §…”
State v. Mathieu, 795 P.2d 1303 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 2× “We also note a recent trend on the part of the legislature and our courts to accord credit for time spent in custody in a variety of circumstances.”
State v. Felkins, 749 P.2d 946 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1988). “Because Section 13-606 [renumbered as § 13-1006] eliminates the defense that the co-conspirator lacked the requisite state of mind (therefore no conspiratorial agreement), the code imposes conspiracy liability on one who conspires with an undercover police officer, a decoy, an…”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-606(B) — 4 cases
State v. Cofield, 107 P.3d 930 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2005). “§ 13-605(D) (2001) (mandating credit for presentence diagnostic commitment of defendant in custody of DOC to aid in sentencing); A.R.S. § 13-606(B) (2001) (mandating credit for civil commitment during prison term); A.”
State v. Reynolds, 823 P.2d 681 (Ariz. 1992). “…those circumstances are. See, e.g., § 13-605(D) (mandates credit for periods of commitment for diagnostic purposes); § 13-606(B) (mandates credit for periods of civil commitment); § 13-709(C) (mandates credit at resentencing for time served under a vacated sentence); §…”
State v. Mathieu, 795 P.2d 1303 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1990). “We also note a recent trend on the part of the legislature and our courts to accord credit for time spent in custody in a variety of circumstances.”
State v. Bomar, 19 P.3d 613 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2001). “section 13-606 (1989) may undergo treatment and then be returned to serve the balance of sentence in prison.”
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.