Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 14-5206 (2026)

Court appointment of guardian of minor; qualifications; priority of minor's nominee; fingerprints

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section AZ-LEGazleg.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A. The court shall appoint as guardian a person whose appointment would be in the best interests of the minor. The court may appoint a person nominated by the minor, if the minor is fourteen years of age or older, unless the court finds the appointment contrary to the best interests of the minor.

B. Before the court may appoint as guardian a person unrelated to the minor, the court shall, in order to determine the applicant's suitability as a guardian, require the potential guardian to furnish a full set of fingerprints to the court to enable a criminal background investigation to be conducted. The court shall submit the completed fingerprint card with the fee prescribed in section 41-1750 to the department of public safety. The applicant shall bear the cost of obtaining the criminal background information. The cost shall not exceed the actual cost of obtaining the applicant's criminal background information. The department of public safety shall conduct criminal history records checks pursuant to section 41-1750 and applicable federal law. The department of public safety is authorized to submit fingerprint card information to the federal bureau of investigation for a national criminal history records check.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases, 1977–1987 · leading case: Morales v. Glenn, 560 P.2d 1234 (Ariz. 1977).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Morales v. Glenn, 560 P.2d 1234 (Ariz. 1977). · cites it 4× “” A.R.S. § 14-5206. Benjamin did nominate his grandmother to be his guardian.”

Bechtel v. Rose in & for Maricopa Cnty., 722 P.2d 236 (Ariz. 1986). · cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 14-5206 (probate code) provides in part that, "The Court shall appoint as guardian a person whose appointment would be in the best interests of the minor.”

Matter of Guardianship of Cruz, 741 P.2d 317 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 2× “The mandatory “shall” in § 14-5207(B) would be rendered meaningless if we adopt the district’s interpretation.”

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.