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

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-708 (2026)

Offenses committed while released from confinement

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

A. A person who is convicted of any felony involving a dangerous offense that is committed while the person is on probation for a conviction of a felony offense or parole, work furlough, community supervision or any other release or has escaped from confinement for conviction of a felony offense shall be sentenced to imprisonment for not less than the presumptive sentence authorized under this chapter and is not eligible for suspension or commutation or release on any basis until the sentence imposed is served.

B. A person who is convicted of a dangerous offense that is committed while the person is on release or has escaped from confinement for a conviction of a serious offense as defined in section 13-706, an offense resulting in serious physical injury or an offense involving the use or exhibition of a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument shall be sentenced to the maximum sentence authorized under this chapter and is not eligible for suspension or commutation or release on any basis until the sentence imposed is served. If the court finds that at least two substantial aggravating circumstances listed in section 13-701, subsection D apply, the court may increase the maximum sentence authorized under this chapter by up to twenty-five percent.

C. A person who is convicted of any felony offense that is not included in subsection A or B of this section and that is committed while the person is on probation for a conviction of a felony offense or parole, work furlough, community supervision or any other release or escape from confinement for conviction of a felony offense shall be sentenced to a term of not less than the presumptive sentence authorized for the offense and the person is not eligible for suspension of sentence, probation, pardon or release from confinement on any basis except as specifically authorized by section 31-233, subsection A or B until the sentence imposed by the court has been served, the person is eligible for release pursuant to section 41-1604.07 or the sentence is commuted. The release provisions prescribed by this section shall not be substituted for any penalties required by the substantive offense or provision of law that specifies a later release or completion of the sentence imposed before release. For the purposes of this subsection, "substantive offense" means the felony, misdemeanor or petty offense that the trier of fact found beyond a reasonable doubt the defendant committed. Substantive offense does not include allegations that, if proven, would enhance the sentence of imprisonment or fine to which the defendant would otherwise be subject.

D. A person who is convicted of committing any felony offense that is committed while the person is released on bond or on the person's own recognizance on a separate felony offense or while the person is escaped from preconviction custody for a separate felony offense shall be sentenced to a term of imprisonment two years longer than would otherwise be imposed for the felony offense committed while on release. The additional sentence imposed under this subsection is in addition to any enhanced punishment that may be applicable under section 13-703, section 13-704, section 13-1204, subsection C or section 13-714.  The person is not eligible for suspension of sentence, probation, pardon or release from confinement on any basis, except as specifically authorized by section 31-233, subsection A or B, until the two years are served, the person is eligible for release pursuant to section 41-1604.07 or the sentence is commuted. The penalties prescribed by this subsection shall be substituted for the penalties otherwise authorized by law if the allegation that the person committed a felony while released on bond or on the person's own recognizance or while escaped from preconviction custody is charged in the indictment or information and admitted or found by the court. The release provisions prescribed by this subsection shall not be substituted for any penalties required by the substantive offense or provision of law that specifies a later release or completion of the sentence imposed before release. The court shall allow the allegation that the person committed a felony while released on bond or on the person's own recognizance on a separate felony offense or while escaped from preconviction custody on a separate felony offense at any time before the case is actually tried unless the allegation is filed fewer than twenty days before the case is actually tried and the court finds on the record that the person was in fact prejudiced by the untimely filing and states the reasons for these findings. The allegation that the person committed a felony while released on bond or on the person's own recognizance or while escaped from preconviction custody shall not be read to the jury. For the purposes of this subsection, "substantive offense" means the felony offense that the trier of fact found beyond a reasonable doubt the person committed. Substantive offense does not include allegations that, if proven, would enhance the sentence of imprisonment or fine to which the person otherwise would be subject.

E. A sentence imposed pursuant to subsection A, B or C of this section shall revoke the convicted person's release if the person was on release and shall be consecutive to any other sentence from which the convicted person had been temporarily released or had escaped, unless the sentence from which the convicted person had been paroled or placed on probation was imposed by a jurisdiction other than this state.

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 173 cases (25 in the last 5 years), 1980–2026 · leading case: State v. Large, 321 P.3d 439 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Large, 321 P.3d 439 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 36× “DISCUSSION ¶ 7 Large challenges his conviction and sentence on several grounds: (1) the State failed to present sufficient evidence that his intent to commit robbery coexisted with his use of force; (2) he was entitled to have a jury find beyond a reasonable doubt that he was on…”
State v. Dixon, 735 P.2d 761 (Ariz. 1987). · cites it 24× “A.R.S. § 13-708. Defendant was sentenced to life imprisonment on each count with the sentences to run consecutively.”
State v. Piotrowski, 315 P.3d 1252 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 43× “Like § 13-708(0, § 13-604.01(B) addressed sentencing for a felony offense committed “while the person is on probation, parole, work furlough or other release” for a prior felony conviction, and provided that “a sentence imposed pursuant to this subsection shall be consecutive to…”
State v. Garza, 962 P.2d 898 (Ariz. 1998). · cites it 19× “Does A.R.S. § 13-708 create a presumption in favor of imposing consecutive sentences? 2.”
State v. Robinson, 735 P.2d 801 (Ariz. 1987). · cites it 6× “When Robinson was sentenced, A.R.S. § 13-708 allowed consecutive sentences if “the court .”
State v. Hallman, 668 P.2d 874 (Ariz. 1983). · cites it 8× “[the sentences] shall run concurrently unless the court expressly directs otherwise, in which case the court shall set forth on the record the reason for its sentence.”
State v. Davis, 79 P.3d 64 (Ariz. 2003). · cites it 4× “§ 13-1304 (2001), sexual assault of a victim older than fifteen, A.R.S. § 13-1406 (2001), first degree burglary of a residential structure, A.”
State v. Meeker, 693 P.2d 911 (Ariz. 1984). · cites it 8× “§ 13-708 which deals with concurrent terms of imprisonment states: "If multiple sentences of imprisonment are imposed on a person at the same time, or when a person who is subject to any undischarged term of imprisonment imposed at a previous time is sentenced to an additional…”
State v. Ward, 26 P.3d 1158 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 8× “section 13-708 1 is “conspicuously absent” from the language of section 13-502(D), the trial court had no authority to commit him to consecutive terms.”
State v. McCall, 770 P.2d 1165 (Ariz. 1989). · cites it 8× “Defendant also claims that the trial court erred by failing adequately to state reasons for consecutive sentences as A.R.S. § 13-708 requires. A.R.S. § 13-708 states that “if multiple sentences of imprisonment are imposed on a person at the same time,” then the sentences imposed…”
State v. Burns, 298 P.3d 911 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 19× “In conjunction with the burglary proceeding, the court found Burns violated his probation by committing the burglary, and, at the same hearing at which it imposed sentence on the burglary conviction, the court reinstated Burns’s lifetime probation to begin upon his completion of…”
State v. Girdler, 675 P.2d 1301 (Ariz. 1983). · cites it 5× “A.R.S. § 13-708; Rule 26.13, Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure, 17 A.”
Show all 173 citing cases →
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-708(0) — 2 cases
State v. Piotrowski, 315 P.3d 1252 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014). “Like § 13-708(0, § 13-604.01(B) addressed sentencing for a felony offense committed “while the person is on probation, parole, work furlough or other release” for a prior felony conviction, and provided that “a sentence imposed pursuant to this subsection shall be consecutive to…”
State v. Botkin, 209 P.3d 137 (Ariz. 2009).
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-708(A) — 15 cases
State v. Large, 321 P.3d 439 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014). “DISCUSSION ¶ 7 Large challenges his conviction and sentence on several grounds: (1) the State failed to present sufficient evidence that his intent to commit robbery coexisted with his use of force; (2) he was entitled to have a jury find beyond a reasonable doubt that he was on…”
State of Arizona v. Phil Gutierrez, 278 P.3d 1276 (Ariz. 2012).
State of Arizona v. valencia/healer, 386 P.3d 392 (Ariz. 2016).
State v. Piotrowski, 315 P.3d 1252 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014). “Like § 13-708(0, § 13-604.01(B) addressed sentencing for a felony offense committed “while the person is on probation, parole, work furlough or other release” for a prior felony conviction, and provided that “a sentence imposed pursuant to this subsection shall be consecutive to…”
State v. Sandoval (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014).
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-708(B) — 4 cases
State of Arizona v. Debbie Lynn Copeland, 310 P.3d 46 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2013).
State v. Francisco (Ariz. Ct. App. 2017).
State v. Jarrett (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014).
Ortiz v. Shinn (D. Ariz. 2021).
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-708(C) — 32 cases
State v. Piotrowski, 315 P.3d 1252 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014). “Like § 13-708(0, § 13-604.01(B) addressed sentencing for a felony offense committed “while the person is on probation, parole, work furlough or other release” for a prior felony conviction, and provided that “a sentence imposed pursuant to this subsection shall be consecutive to…”
State v. Burns, 298 P.3d 911 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2013). “In conjunction with the burglary proceeding, the court found Burns violated his probation by committing the burglary, and, at the same hearing at which it imposed sentence on the burglary conviction, the court reinstated Burns’s lifetime probation to begin upon his completion of…”
State of Arizona v. Victor Kyle Lizardi, 323 P.3d 1152 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014).
State v. Young, 282 P.3d 1285 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2012).
State v. Botkin, 209 P.3d 137 (Ariz. 2009).
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-708(D) — 19 cases
State v. Large, 321 P.3d 439 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014). “DISCUSSION ¶ 7 Large challenges his conviction and sentence on several grounds: (1) the State failed to present sufficient evidence that his intent to commit robbery coexisted with his use of force; (2) he was entitled to have a jury find beyond a reasonable doubt that he was on…”
State v. Torres Moreno, 473 P.3d 722 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2020).
State v. Castillejo (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019).
State v. Tapia-Munoz (Ariz. Ct. App. 2025).
State v. Koch (Ariz. Ct. App. 2020).
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-708(E) — 7 cases
State v. Zamora (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016).
State v. McGhee (Ariz. Ct. App. 2017).
State v. Jackson (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019).
State v. Hopson (Ariz. Ct. App. 2021).
State v. Turner (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023).
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-708(F)(5) — 2 cases
Scott Douglas Nordstrom v. State of Arizona, 142 P.3d 1247 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2006).
Gerlaugh v. Lewis, 898 F. Supp. 1388 (D. Ariz. 1995).
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-708(F)(6) — 1 case
State v. Ramirez, 871 P.2d 237 (Ariz. 1994).
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-708(G) — 1 case
State v. White, 815 P.2d 869 (Ariz. 1991).
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.