Ariz. Rev. Stat. » Title 25
Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403.03 (2026)

Domestic violence and child abuse

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

25-403.03. Domestic violence and child abuse

A. Notwithstanding subsection D of this section, joint legal decision-making shall not be awarded if the court makes a finding of the existence of significant domestic violence pursuant to section 13-3601 or if the court finds by a preponderance of the evidence that there has been a significant history of domestic violence.

B. The court shall consider evidence of domestic violence as being contrary to the best interests of the child.  The court shall consider the safety and well-being of the child and of the victim of the act of domestic violence to be of primary importance. The court shall consider a perpetrator's history of causing or threatening to cause physical harm to another person.

C. To determine if a person has committed an act of domestic violence the court, subject to the rules of evidence, shall consider all relevant factors including the following:

1. Findings from another court of competent jurisdiction.

2. Police reports.

3. Medical reports.

4. Records of the department of child safety.

5. Domestic violence shelter records.

6. School records.

7. Witness testimony.

D. If the court determines that a parent who is seeking sole or joint legal decision-making has committed an act of domestic violence against the other parent, there is a rebuttable presumption that an award of sole or joint legal decision-making to the parent who committed the act of domestic violence is contrary to the child's best interests.  This presumption does not apply if both parents have committed an act of domestic violence.  For the purposes of this subsection, a person commits an act of domestic violence if that person does any of the following:

1. Intentionally, knowingly or recklessly causes or attempts to cause sexual assault or serious physical injury.

2. Places a person in reasonable apprehension of imminent serious physical injury to any person.

3. Engages in a pattern of behavior for which a court may issue an ex parte order to protect the other parent who is seeking child custody or to protect the child and the child's siblings. 

E. To determine if the parent has rebutted the presumption the court shall consider all of the following:

1. Whether the parent has demonstrated that being awarded sole or joint legal decision-making or substantially equal parenting time is in the child's best interests.

2. Whether the parent has successfully completed a batterer's prevention program.

3. Whether the parent has successfully completed a program of alcohol or drug abuse counseling, if the court determines that counseling is appropriate.

4. Whether the parent has successfully completed a parenting class, if the court determines that a parenting class is appropriate.

5. If the parent is on probation, parole or community supervision, whether the parent is restrained by a protective order that was granted after a hearing.

6. Whether the parent has committed any further acts of domestic violence.

F. If the court finds that a parent has committed an act of domestic violence, that parent has the burden of proving to the court's satisfaction that parenting time will not endanger the child or significantly impair the child's emotional development. If the parent meets this burden to the court's satisfaction, the court shall place conditions on parenting time that best protect the child and the other parent from further harm. The court may:

1. Order that an exchange of the child must occur in a protected setting as specified by the court.

2. Order that an agency specified by the court must supervise parenting time. If the court allows a family or household member to supervise parenting time, the court shall establish conditions that this person must follow during parenting time.

3. Order the parent who committed the act of domestic violence to attend and complete, to the court's satisfaction, a program of intervention for perpetrators of domestic violence and any other counseling the court orders.

4. Order the parent who committed the act of domestic violence to abstain from possessing or consuming alcohol or controlled substances during parenting time and for twenty-four hours before parenting time.

5. Order the parent who committed the act of domestic violence to pay a fee for the costs of supervised parenting time.

6. Prohibit overnight parenting time.

7. Require a bond from the parent who committed the act of domestic violence for the child's safe return.

8. Order that the address of the child and the other parent remain confidential.

9. Impose any other condition that the court determines is necessary to protect the child, the other parent and any other family or household member.

G. The court shall not order joint counseling between a victim and the perpetrator of domestic violence. The court may provide a victim with written information about available community resources related to domestic violence.

H. The court may request or order the services of the department of child safety if the court believes that a child may be the victim of child abuse or neglect as defined in section 8-201.

I. In determining whether the absence or relocation of a parent shall be weighed against that parent in determining legal decision-making or parenting time, the court may consider whether the absence or relocation was caused by an act of domestic violence by the other parent.

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 98 cases (57 in the last 5 years), 2009–2026 · leading case: Deluna v. Petitto, 450 P.3d 1273 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Deluna v. Petitto, 450 P.3d 1273 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 29× “See A.R.S. § 25-403.03. At times, those statutes and amendments have been imprecise or lack definitions of critical terms, leading to confusion and unintended errors by the superior court in 3 By comparison, in 2010, there were 19,461 family court cases involving children filed…”
Olesen v. daniel/burge, 484 P.3d 139 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 23× “Because A.R.S. § 25-403.03 requires the superior court to consider domestic 6 OLESEN v.”
Christopher K. v. Markaa S., 311 P.3d 1110 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 13× “And when domestic violence is found, A.R.S. § 25-403.03 requires that the court accord the issue “primary importance” and treat the evidence as contrary to the best interests of the child.”
Cardoso v. Soldo, 277 P.3d 811 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 7× “Section 25-403.03(A) (2008) prohibits a court from awarding joint custody if it finds “by a preponderance of the evidence that there has been a significant history of domestic violence.”
Courtney v. Hon. foster/courtney, 334 P.3d 1272 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 9× “A.R.S. § 25-403.03(F). ¶ 8 Section 25-403.”
Vera v. Hon rogers/chaidez, 433 P.3d 1190 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 4× “§ 25-403(A)(8); see also A.R.S. § 25-403.03(F) (listing examples of conditions the superior court may place on parenting time).”
Kelly v. Kelly, 503 P.3d 822 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2021). “between the parent and the child,” “[t]he interaction and interrelationship of the child with the child’s parent or parents,” “[t]he mental and physical health of all individuals involved,” “[w]hich parent is more likely to allow the child frequent, meaningful and continuing…”
Reynolds v. Spencer (Ariz. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 44× “We vacate and remand for new findings on whether Father committed significant domestic violence under A.R.S. § 25-403.03. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND ¶2 Korina Darlene Spencer (“Mother”) and Father are the parents of five minor children.”
Paredes-Gabriel v. Riva (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 42× “Specifically, the court found that Mother’s domestic violence allegations against Father and his family required it to consider “the award of legal decision-making authority and parenting time in light of the alleged presence of domestic violence under A.R.S. § 25-403.03.” See…”
Jones-Wright v. Wright (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 29× “§ 25-403(A), including whether there has been domestic violence or child abuse under A.R.S. § 25-403.03. The court must not award joint legal decision-making if it finds either “significant domestic violence” under A.”
Mesa v. O'Connor, 563 P.3d 1179 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2025). “01(B) factors and the lack of domestic violence, substance abuse, or sex offenses under §§ 25-403.03, -403.04, and -403.05. Thus, the error noted in DePasquale and Nold does not exist here.”
Samuel Fuentes v. Tucson City Court Hon. Jay Cranshaw, 541 P.3d 573 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 27× “¶16 In addition, courts determining legal decision-making and parenting time must consider “all factors that are relevant to the child’s physical and emotional well-being.”
Show all 98 citing cases →
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403.03(A) — 41 cases
Deluna v. Petitto, 450 P.3d 1273 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019). “See A.R.S. § 25-403.03. At times, those statutes and amendments have been imprecise or lack definitions of critical terms, leading to confusion and unintended errors by the superior court in 3 By comparison, in 2010, there were 19,461 family court cases involving children filed…”
Cardoso v. Soldo, 277 P.3d 811 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2012). “Section 25-403.03(A) (2008) prohibits a court from awarding joint custody if it finds “by a preponderance of the evidence that there has been a significant history of domestic violence.”
Reynolds v. Spencer (Ariz. Ct. App. 2024). “We vacate and remand for new findings on whether Father committed significant domestic violence under A.R.S. § 25-403.03. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND ¶2 Korina Darlene Spencer (“Mother”) and Father are the parents of five minor children.”
Paredes-Gabriel v. Riva (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019). “Specifically, the court found that Mother’s domestic violence allegations against Father and his family required it to consider “the award of legal decision-making authority and parenting time in light of the alleged presence of domestic violence under A.R.S. § 25-403.03.” See…”
Farrell v. Myers (Ariz. Ct. App. 2022).
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403.03(B) — 15 cases
Christopher K. v. Markaa S., 311 P.3d 1110 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2013). “And when domestic violence is found, A.R.S. § 25-403.03 requires that the court accord the issue “primary importance” and treat the evidence as contrary to the best interests of the child.”
Gillette v. Arzola (Ariz. Ct. App. 2020).
Atkison v. Shafer (Ariz. Ct. App. 2022).
Washum v. Paskett (Ariz. Ct. App. 2024).
Christopher v. v. Erica O. (Ariz. Ct. App. 2026).
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403.03(C) — 17 cases
Olesen v. daniel/burge, 484 P.3d 139 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2021). “Because A.R.S. § 25-403.03 requires the superior court to consider domestic 6 OLESEN v.”
Bennie v. Johnson (Ariz. Ct. App. 2022).
Polich v. Polich (Ariz. Ct. App. 2025).
Lopez v. Scimone (Ariz. Ct. App. 2022).
Boozer v. Boozer (Ariz. Ct. App. 2024).
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403.03(C)(1) — 3 cases
Cardoso v. Soldo, 277 P.3d 811 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2012). “Section 25-403.03(A) (2008) prohibits a court from awarding joint custody if it finds “by a preponderance of the evidence that there has been a significant history of domestic violence.”
Arjona v. Arjona (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023).
Lincoln v. McDaniel (Ariz. Ct. App. 2026).
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403.03(C)(2) — 2 cases
Garner v. Daurio (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019).
Bennie v. Johnson (Ariz. Ct. App. 2022).
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403.03(C)(4) — 1 case
Garner v. Daurio (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019).
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403.03(C)(7) — 1 case
Christopher K. v. Markaa S., 311 P.3d 1110 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2013). “And when domestic violence is found, A.R.S. § 25-403.03 requires that the court accord the issue “primary importance” and treat the evidence as contrary to the best interests of the child.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403.03(D) — 50 cases
Deluna v. Petitto, 450 P.3d 1273 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019). “See A.R.S. § 25-403.03. At times, those statutes and amendments have been imprecise or lack definitions of critical terms, leading to confusion and unintended errors by the superior court in 3 By comparison, in 2010, there were 19,461 family court cases involving children filed…”
Olesen v. daniel/burge, 484 P.3d 139 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2021). “Because A.R.S. § 25-403.03 requires the superior court to consider domestic 6 OLESEN v.”
Cardoso v. Soldo, 277 P.3d 811 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2012). “Section 25-403.03(A) (2008) prohibits a court from awarding joint custody if it finds “by a preponderance of the evidence that there has been a significant history of domestic violence.”
Christopher K. v. Markaa S., 311 P.3d 1110 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2013). “And when domestic violence is found, A.R.S. § 25-403.03 requires that the court accord the issue “primary importance” and treat the evidence as contrary to the best interests of the child.”
Paredes-Gabriel v. Riva (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019). “Specifically, the court found that Mother’s domestic violence allegations against Father and his family required it to consider “the award of legal decision-making authority and parenting time in light of the alleged presence of domestic violence under A.R.S. § 25-403.03.” See…”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403.03(D)(1) — 3 cases
Paredes-Gabriel v. Riva (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019). “Specifically, the court found that Mother’s domestic violence allegations against Father and his family required it to consider “the award of legal decision-making authority and parenting time in light of the alleged presence of domestic violence under A.R.S. § 25-403.03.” See…”
Samuel Fuentes v. Tucson City Court Hon. Jay Cranshaw, 541 P.3d 573 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023). “¶16 In addition, courts determining legal decision-making and parenting time must consider “all factors that are relevant to the child’s physical and emotional well-being.”
Engstrom v. McCarthy, 411 P.3d 653 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2018).
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403.03(D)(3) — 4 cases
Cardoso v. Soldo, 277 P.3d 811 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2012). “Section 25-403.03(A) (2008) prohibits a court from awarding joint custody if it finds “by a preponderance of the evidence that there has been a significant history of domestic violence.”
Garcia v. Vallon (Ariz. Ct. App. 2025).
Lance Ross v. Hon. Deborah Pratte (Ariz. Ct. App. 2022).
Samuel Fuentes v. Tucson City Court Hon. Jay Cranshaw, 541 P.3d 573 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023). “¶16 In addition, courts determining legal decision-making and parenting time must consider “all factors that are relevant to the child’s physical and emotional well-being.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403.03(E) — 28 cases
Olesen v. daniel/burge, 484 P.3d 139 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2021). “Because A.R.S. § 25-403.03 requires the superior court to consider domestic 6 OLESEN v.”
Deluna v. Petitto, 450 P.3d 1273 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019). “See A.R.S. § 25-403.03. At times, those statutes and amendments have been imprecise or lack definitions of critical terms, leading to confusion and unintended errors by the superior court in 3 By comparison, in 2010, there were 19,461 family court cases involving children filed…”
Rodriguez v. Reynolds (Ariz. Ct. App. 2021).
Olesen v. daniel/burge (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023).
Jones-Wright v. Wright (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023). “§ 25-403(A), including whether there has been domestic violence or child abuse under A.R.S. § 25-403.03. The court must not award joint legal decision-making if it finds either “significant domestic violence” under A.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403.03(E)(1) — 4 cases
Farrell v. Myers (Ariz. Ct. App. 2022).
Lopez v. Lopez (Ariz. Ct. App. 2024).
Gurule v. Mays (Ariz. Ct. App. 2026).
Olesen v. daniel/burge (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023).
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403.03(E)(2) — 2 cases
Lincoln v. McDaniel (Ariz. Ct. App. 2026).
Olesen v. daniel/burge (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023).
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403.03(E)(5) — 1 case
Swanson v. Swanson (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023).
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403.03(E)(6) — 1 case
Lopez v. Scimone (Ariz. Ct. App. 2022).
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403.03(F) — 28 cases
Deluna v. Petitto, 450 P.3d 1273 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019). “See A.R.S. § 25-403.03. At times, those statutes and amendments have been imprecise or lack definitions of critical terms, leading to confusion and unintended errors by the superior court in 3 By comparison, in 2010, there were 19,461 family court cases involving children filed…”
Courtney v. Hon. foster/courtney, 334 P.3d 1272 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014). “A.R.S. § 25-403.03(F). ¶ 8 Section 25-403.”
Vera v. Hon rogers/chaidez, 433 P.3d 1190 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2018). “§ 25-403(A)(8); see also A.R.S. § 25-403.03(F) (listing examples of conditions the superior court may place on parenting time).”
Olesen v. daniel/burge, 484 P.3d 139 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2021). “Because A.R.S. § 25-403.03 requires the superior court to consider domestic 6 OLESEN v.”
Castro v. Cartter (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023).
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403.03(F)(1) — 4 cases
Paredes-Gabriel v. Riva (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019). “Specifically, the court found that Mother’s domestic violence allegations against Father and his family required it to consider “the award of legal decision-making authority and parenting time in light of the alleged presence of domestic violence under A.R.S. § 25-403.03.” See…”
Engstrom v. McCarthy, 411 P.3d 653 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2018).
Washum v. Paskett (Ariz. Ct. App. 2024).
In Re the Marriage of Morris & Mandel, 529 P.3d 94 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023).
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403.03(F)(2) — 2 cases
Bennie v. Johnson (Ariz. Ct. App. 2022).
Anderson v. Wallace (Ariz. Ct. App. 2025).
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403.03(F)(3) — 1 case
Burton-Anderson v. Anderson (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016).
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403.03(F)(5) — 1 case
Smith v. Smith (Ariz. Ct. App. 2021).
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403.03(F)(9) — 4 cases
Jones-Wright v. Wright (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023). “§ 25-403(A), including whether there has been domestic violence or child abuse under A.R.S. § 25-403.03. The court must not award joint legal decision-making if it finds either “significant domestic violence” under A.”
Schneider v. Perea (Ariz. Ct. App. 2024).
Davey v. Roberts (Ariz. Ct. App. 2024).
Samuel Fuentes v. Tucson City Court Hon. Jay Cranshaw, 541 P.3d 573 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023). “¶16 In addition, courts determining legal decision-making and parenting time must consider “all factors that are relevant to the child’s physical and emotional well-being.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-403.03(G) — 1 case
Farrell v. Myers (Ariz. Ct. App. 2022).
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.