A. Except as provided in sections 13-822 and 13-823, a sentence to pay a fine that is imposed on an enterprise for an offense defined in this title or for an offense defined outside this title for which no special enterprise fine is specified shall be a sentence to pay an amount, fixed by the court, of not more than:
1. For a felony, one million dollars.
2. For a class 1 misdemeanor, twenty thousand dollars.
3. For a class 2 misdemeanor, ten thousand dollars.
4. For a class 3 misdemeanor, two thousand dollars.
5. For a petty offense, one thousand dollars.
B. If the court imposes a fine, the court shall impose as a presumptive fine the median of the allowable range under subsection A of this section and the presumptive fine may be mitigated or aggravated pursuant to this section.
C. After considering the factors listed in subsection F of this section, the court shall determine an appropriate fine. If the court deviates from the presumptive fine, the court shall set forth on the record the fine, if any, and how the relevant factors listed in subsection F of this section affected the court's determination.
D. Subsections B, C and F of this section and sections 13-822 and 13-823 do not apply to sentences for misdemeanor violations that are prosecuted in justice court or municipal court, except that the court may consider the factors listed in subsection F of this section and section 13-822 in determining the fine to impose.
E. A judgment that the enterprise shall pay a fine shall constitute a lien in like manner as a judgment for money rendered in a civil action.
F. If the court deviates from the presumptive fine, the court shall base its decision on any evidence or information that was introduced or submitted to it before sentencing or on any evidence that was previously heard at trial and shall consider the following factors, if relevant:
1. The income and assets of the enterprise and the economic impact of the penalty on the enterprise.
2. Any prior criminal, civil or regulatory misconduct by the enterprise.
3. The degree of harm resulting from the offense.
4. Whether the offense resulted in pecuniary gain.
5. Whether the enterprise made good faith efforts to comply with any applicable requirements.
6. The duration of the offense.
7. The role of the directors, officers or principals of the enterprise in the offense.
8. Whether the offense involved an unusually vulnerable victim due to age, physical or mental condition or any other factor that would make the victim particularly susceptible to criminal conduct.
9. Whether the offense involved a threat to a market.
10. Whether the enterprise breached a fiduciary duty in committing the offense.
11. The obligation of the enterprise to pay restitution.
12. Any other factors that the court deems appropriate.
Notes of Decisions
State v. Far West Water & Sewer Inc., 228 P.3d 909 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2010).
· cites it 15× “Section 13-803 provides for the imposition of fines against “enterprises” convicted of criminal offenses.”
Hawkins v. Allstate Ins., 733 P.2d 1073 (Ariz. 1987).
· cites it 4× “See A.R.S. § 13-803(A)(1) (Supp. 1986). The amount of the award in this case is a clear illustration of the penal nature of such damages.”
Williams v. Williams, 801 P.2d 495 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1990).
· cites it 4× “§ 25-319, which describes the spousal-maintenance obligation, and A.R.S. § 13-803 (now A.R.S. § 13-3611), it was clearly the husband’s duty to support his wife during their marriage.”
State v. Maupin, 801 P.2d 485 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1990).
· cites it 4× “§ 13-803 was renamed to include the title “fine for reimbursement of public monies,” and the following subsection was added: (E) The court may impose an additional fine upon sentencing for any offense to require that the defendant reimburse the law enforcement agency for any…”
Hudgins v. Sw. Airlines, Co., 212 P.3d 810 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2009).
· cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 13-803(A), (B) (2001). 11 ¶ 62 Athough we can examine criminal penalties for guidance, they are largely unhelpful.”
State v. Skiles, 704 P.2d 283 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1985).
· cites it 4× “There may be cases in which leaving the scene of an accident may aggravate the initial injuries suffered in the accident.”
Matter of Est. of Vigliotto, 870 P.2d 1163 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1993).
· cites it 3× “While § 13-603 did not provide the court with authority to order an imprisoned defendant to pay restitution, such authority was provided in § 13-803(A), which stated in pertinent part as follows: A.”
State v. Pleasant, 701 P.2d 15 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1985).
· cites it 3× “Appellant bases his contention on A.R.S. § 13-803(A) which provides that “[u]pon a defendant’s conviction for an offense resulting in the death, physical injury or economic loss of the victim, the court may order that all or any portion of the fine imposed be allocated as…”
State v. Monick, 611 P.2d 946 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1980).
· cites it 3× “A.R.S. § 13-803 2 allows the court to impose a fine where applicable and to direct that all or a portion of such fine be allocated as restitution to the victim.”
Az Petition Partners v. Hon. thompson/state (Ariz. Ct. App. 2022).
· cites it 8× “Noting that the presumptive fine for an enterprise is $10,000, the State argues that exposure to such a fine does not increase the burden because the fine is limited only to enterprises, is “not mandatory,” and is subject to the superior court’s discretion.”
Ellis v. Comm'r, 51 T.C. 182 (Tax Ct. 1968).
· cites it 2× “Moreover, petitioner's obligation to support his wife during coverture is firmly established by Arizona law.”
Az Petition Partners LLC v. Hon. thompson/state, 530 P.3d 1144 (Ariz. 2023).
· cites it 2× “Because the State also filed allegations of aggravating factors under A.R.S. § 13-803 and A.R.S. § 13-823, 1 Petition Partners faces a potential fine of $5 million if convicted.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-803(2001) — 1 case
State v. Far West Water & Sewer Inc., 228 P.3d 909 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2010).
“Section 13-803 provides for the imposition of fines against “enterprises” convicted of criminal offenses.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-803(A) — 4 cases
Hudgins v. Sw. Airlines, Co., 212 P.3d 810 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2009).
“A.R.S. § 13-803(A), (B) (2001). 11 ¶ 62 Athough we can examine criminal penalties for guidance, they are largely unhelpful.”
Matter of Est. of Vigliotto, 870 P.2d 1163 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1993).
“While § 13-603 did not provide the court with authority to order an imprisoned defendant to pay restitution, such authority was provided in § 13-803(A), which stated in pertinent part as follows: A.”
State v. Pleasant, 701 P.2d 15 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1985).
“Appellant bases his contention on A.R.S. § 13-803(A) which provides that “[u]pon a defendant’s conviction for an offense resulting in the death, physical injury or economic loss of the victim, the court may order that all or any portion of the fine imposed be allocated as…”
State v. Monick, 611 P.2d 946 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1980).
“A.R.S. § 13-803 2 allows the court to impose a fine where applicable and to direct that all or a portion of such fine be allocated as restitution to the victim.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-803(A)(1) — 3 cases
Hawkins v. Allstate Ins., 733 P.2d 1073 (Ariz. 1987).
“See A.R.S. § 13-803(A)(1) (Supp. 1986). The amount of the award in this case is a clear illustration of the penal nature of such damages.”
State v. Far West Water & Sewer Inc., 228 P.3d 909 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2010).
“Section 13-803 provides for the imposition of fines against “enterprises” convicted of criminal offenses.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-803(A)(2) — 1 case
Az Petition Partners v. Hon. thompson/state (Ariz. Ct. App. 2022).
“Noting that the presumptive fine for an enterprise is $10,000, the State argues that exposure to such a fine does not increase the burden because the fine is limited only to enterprises, is “not mandatory,” and is subject to the superior court’s discretion.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-803(C) — 1 case
State v. Far West Water & Sewer Inc., 228 P.3d 909 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2010).
“Section 13-803 provides for the imposition of fines against “enterprises” convicted of criminal offenses.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-803(D) — 1 case
State v. Skiles, 704 P.2d 283 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1985).
“There may be cases in which leaving the scene of an accident may aggravate the initial injuries suffered in the accident.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-803(F) — 2 cases
State v. Far West Water & Sewer Inc., 228 P.3d 909 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2010).
“Section 13-803 provides for the imposition of fines against “enterprises” convicted of criminal offenses.”
Az Petition Partners v. Hon. thompson/state (Ariz. Ct. App. 2022).
“Noting that the presumptive fine for an enterprise is $10,000, the State argues that exposure to such a fine does not increase the burden because the fine is limited only to enterprises, is “not mandatory,” and is subject to the superior court’s discretion.”
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.