A. A person may petition the court that entered an order, finding or adjudication that resulted in the person being a prohibited possessor as defined in section 13-3101, subsection A, paragraph 7, subdivision (a) or subject to 18 United States Code section 922(d)(4) or (g)(4) to restore the person's right to possess a firearm.
B. The person or the person's guardian or attorney may file the petition. The petition shall be served on the attorney for the state who appeared in the underlying case.
C. On the filing of the petition the court shall set a hearing. At the hearing, the person shall present psychological or psychiatric evidence in support of the petition. The state shall provide the court with the person's criminal history records, if any. The court shall receive evidence on and consider the following before granting or denying the petition:
1. The circumstances that resulted in the person being a prohibited possessor as defined in section 13-3101, subsection A, paragraph 7, subdivision (a) or subject to 18 United States Code section 922(d)(4) or (g)(4).
2. The person's record, including the person's mental health record and criminal history record, if any.
3. The person's reputation based on character witness statements, testimony or other character evidence.
4. Whether the person is a danger to self or others or has persistent, acute or grave disabilities or whether the circumstances that led to the original order, adjudication or finding remain in effect.
5. Any change in the person's condition or circumstances that is relevant to the relief sought.
6. Any other evidence deemed admissible by the court.
D. The petitioner shall prove by clear and convincing evidence both of the following:
1. The petitioner is not likely to act in a manner that is dangerous to public safety.
2. Granting the requested relief is not contrary to the public interest.
E. At the conclusion of the hearing, the court shall issue findings of fact and conclusions of law.
F. If the court grants the petition for relief, the original order, finding or adjudication is deemed not to have occurred for the purposes of applying section 13-3101, subsection A, paragraph 7, subdivision (a), Public Law 110-180, section 105(a) or 18 United States Code section 922(d)(4) or (g)(4) to that person.
G. The granting of a petition under this section only restores the person's right to possess a firearm and does not apply to and has no effect on any other rights or benefits the person receives.
H. The court shall promptly notify the supreme court and the department of public safety of an order granting a petition under this section. As soon thereafter as practicable the supreme court and the department shall update, correct, modify or remove the person's record in any database that the supreme court or the department maintains and makes available to the national instant criminal background check system consistent with the rules pertaining to the database. Within ten business days after receiving the notification from the court, the department shall notify the United States attorney general that the person no longer falls within the provisions of section 13-3101, subsection A, paragraph 7, subdivision (a) or 18 United States Code section 922(d)(4) or (g)(4).
Notes of Decisions
State v. Petramala (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016).
· cites it 18× “¶4 In 2014, Petramala filed a petition seeking to restore his right to possess firearms pursuant to A.R.S. § 13-925, which the superior court denied.”
State v. Lewis (Ariz. Ct. App. 2021).
· cites it 15× “C A M P B E L L, Judge: ¶1 Jessie Lewis appeals the superior court’s denial of his request for a hearing or judgment under A.R.S. § 13-925 on his petition to restore the right to possess a firearm.”
State v. Petramala (Ariz. Ct. App. 2015).
· cites it 25× “¶11 In 2013, Petramala requested and was granted leave to file a petition pursuant to A.R.S. § 13-925 under the criminal case cause number for restoration of right to possess a firearm.”
In Re: Mh 2022-006131 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2025).
· cites it 14× “("Petitioner") appeals the denial of his petition for restoration of gun rights under A.R.S. § 13-925. For the following reasons, we affirm.”
State v. Perry, 428 P.3d 509 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2018).
· cites it 4× “As a practical matter then, practitioners and courts, for administrative convenience, will more likely file such applications and resulting orders under the pertinent criminal cause number.”
Petramala v. Arizona, State of (D. Ariz. 2020).
· cites it 2× “) The City argues that it “does not have a duty to supply criminally incompetent individuals with free expert witnesses or 15 attorneys” and that it is Petramala’s “sole burden to petition for the restoration of his gun 16 rights,” citing A.R.S. § 13-925 and 18 U.S.C. § 925 (c).…”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-925(A) — 5 cases
State v. Petramala (Ariz. Ct. App. 2015).
“¶11 In 2013, Petramala requested and was granted leave to file a petition pursuant to A.R.S. § 13-925 under the criminal case cause number for restoration of right to possess a firearm.”
State v. Petramala (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016).
“¶4 In 2014, Petramala filed a petition seeking to restore his right to possess firearms pursuant to A.R.S. § 13-925, which the superior court denied.”
State v. Lewis (Ariz. Ct. App. 2021).
“C A M P B E L L, Judge: ¶1 Jessie Lewis appeals the superior court’s denial of his request for a hearing or judgment under A.R.S. § 13-925 on his petition to restore the right to possess a firearm.”
State v. Perry, 428 P.3d 509 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2018).
“As a practical matter then, practitioners and courts, for administrative convenience, will more likely file such applications and resulting orders under the pertinent criminal cause number.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-925(B) — 1 case
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-925(C) — 4 cases
State v. Petramala (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016).
“¶4 In 2014, Petramala filed a petition seeking to restore his right to possess firearms pursuant to A.R.S. § 13-925, which the superior court denied.”
In Re: Mh 2022-006131 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2025).
“("Petitioner") appeals the denial of his petition for restoration of gun rights under A.R.S. § 13-925. For the following reasons, we affirm.”
State v. Petramala (Ariz. Ct. App. 2015).
“¶11 In 2013, Petramala requested and was granted leave to file a petition pursuant to A.R.S. § 13-925 under the criminal case cause number for restoration of right to possess a firearm.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-925(C)(1) — 1 case
State v. Petramala (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016).
“¶4 In 2014, Petramala filed a petition seeking to restore his right to possess firearms pursuant to A.R.S. § 13-925, which the superior court denied.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-925(C)(6) — 1 case
In Re: Mh 2022-006131 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2025).
“("Petitioner") appeals the denial of his petition for restoration of gun rights under A.R.S. § 13-925. For the following reasons, we affirm.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-925(D) — 3 cases
In Re: Mh 2022-006131 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2025).
“("Petitioner") appeals the denial of his petition for restoration of gun rights under A.R.S. § 13-925. For the following reasons, we affirm.”
State v. Petramala (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016).
“¶4 In 2014, Petramala filed a petition seeking to restore his right to possess firearms pursuant to A.R.S. § 13-925, which the superior court denied.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-925(E) — 2 cases
In Re: Mh 2022-006131 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2025).
“("Petitioner") appeals the denial of his petition for restoration of gun rights under A.R.S. § 13-925. For the following reasons, we affirm.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-925(F) — 1 case
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.