A. Except as provided in subsections B and C of this section, all fines collected in any court, except municipal courts, shall be paid to the county treasurer of the county in which the court is held. All fines collected in the superior court for violation of a city or town ordinance shall be paid to the county treasurer.
B. Except as provided in subsection C of this section, all fines or costs collected in any court for offenses indicted by a state grand jury or for other offenses prosecuted by the attorney general shall be paid to the anti-racketeering revolving fund established by section 13-2314.01.
C. Except as provided in section 13-821, all fines collected in any court for offenses included in chapter 34 of this title and prosecuted by a city prosecutor, a county attorney or the attorney general shall be paid to the drug and gang enforcement fund established by section 41-2402.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
4
cases (
1 in the last 5 years), 1992–2022 · leading case:
State v. Payne, 225 P.3d 1131 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2009).
State v. Payne, 225 P.3d 1131 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2009).
· cites it 2× “, A.R.S. § 13-811(A) (“all fines collected in any court .”
State v. Conlin, 832 P.2d 225 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1992).
· cites it 7× “”) section 13-811(C) (1989). The trial court based its ruling on Tumey v.”
State of Arizona v. Elifonso Anthony Cruz, 504 P.3d 283 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2022).
· cites it 3× “2 As the trial court noted, the agreement mistakenly cited A.R.S. § 13-811, which addresses disposition of fines, rather than § 13-118, which provides for a special allegation of sexual motivation.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-811(A) — 2 cases
State v. Payne, 225 P.3d 1131 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2009).
“, A.R.S. § 13-811(A) (“all fines collected in any court .”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-811(C) — 1 case
State v. Conlin, 832 P.2d 225 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1992).
“”) section 13-811(C) (1989). The trial court based its ruling on Tumey v.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-811(G) — 1 case
State v. Conlin, 832 P.2d 225 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1992).
“”) section 13-811(C) (1989). The trial court based its ruling on Tumey v.”
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.