Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 28-4135 (2026)

Motor vehicle financial responsibility requirement; civil penalties; restricted driving privilege; evidence at hearing

✓ current as of May 2026

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

A. A motor vehicle that is operated on a highway in this state shall be covered by one of the following:

1. A motor vehicle or automobile liability policy that provides limits not less than those prescribed in section 28-4009.

2. An alternate method of coverage as provided in section 28-4076.

3. A certificate of self-insurance as prescribed in section 28-4007.

4. A policy that satisfies the financial responsibility requirements prescribed in article 2 of this chapter.

B. A person operating a motor vehicle on a highway in this state shall have evidence within the motor vehicle of current financial responsibility applicable to the motor vehicle. The evidence may be displayed on a wireless communication device that is in the motor vehicle. If a person displays the evidence on a wireless communication device pursuant to this subsection, the person is not consenting for law enforcement to access other contents of the wireless communication device.

C. Failure to produce evidence of financial responsibility on the request of a law enforcement officer investigating a motor vehicle accident or an alleged violation of a motor vehicle law of this state or a traffic ordinance of a city or town is a civil traffic violation that is punishable as prescribed in this section.

D. A citation issued for violating subsection B or C of this section shall be dismissed if the person to whom the citation was issued produces evidence to the appropriate court officer on or before the date and time specified on the citation for court appearance and in a manner specified by the court, including the certification of evidence by mail, of either of the following:

1. The financial responsibility requirements prescribed in this section were met for the motor vehicle at the date and time the citation was issued.

2. A motor vehicle or automobile liability policy that meets the financial responsibility requirements of this state and that insured the person and the motor vehicle the person was operating at the time the person received the citation regardless of whether or not the motor vehicle was named in the policy.

E. Except as provided in section 28-4137, a person who violates this section is subject to a civil penalty as follows:

1. The court shall impose a minimum civil penalty of five hundred dollars for the first violation. On receipt of the abstract of the record of judgment, the department shall suspend the person's driving privileges or restrict the person's driving privileges as described in section 28-144 for three months. Before issuing a restricted driving privilege pursuant to this paragraph, the department shall verify that the person is in compliance with the financial responsibility requirements of this article.

2. If a person violates this section a second time within a period of thirty-six months, the court shall impose a minimum civil penalty of seven hundred fifty dollars. On receipt of the abstract of the record of judgment, the department shall suspend the driver license of the person and the registration and license plates of the motor vehicle involved for six months.

3. If a person violates this section three or more times within a period of thirty-six months, the court shall impose a minimum civil penalty of one thousand dollars. On receipt of the abstract of the record of judgment, the department shall suspend the driver license of the person and the registration and license plates of the motor vehicle involved for one year. The department shall require on reinstatement of the driver license, the registration and the license plates that the person file with the department proof of financial responsibility in accordance with article 3 of this chapter.

F. A court may require a person to produce an insurance identification card as evidence in a hearing for a violation of this section.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 8 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1998–2025 · leading case: Odom v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Arizona, 169 P.3d 120 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2007).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Odom v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Arizona, 169 P.3d 120 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “” See A.R.S. § 28-4135(A) (requiring liability insurance for motor vehicles "operated on a highway in this state”).”

Arizona Dream Act Coalition v. Janice Brewer, 757 F.3d 1053 (9th Cir. 2014). “See Ariz.Rev.Stat. Ann. § 28-4135. In light of this financial responsibility requirement, we are skeptical of Defendants’ suggestion that DACA recipients’ removal would leave accident victims without financial recourse.”

Farmers Ins. Co. of Arizona v. Young, 985 P.2d 507 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 3× “¶ 14 Young contended at oral argument, however, that the “other vehicle” exclusion could create a gap in coverage if the tortfeasor did not “fortuitously” have liability insurance.”

Napier v. Bertram, 954 P.2d 1389 (Ariz. 1998). “See §§ 28-4135, 28-4009, mandating liability coverage.”

Jason W. Bills v. United States Fid. & Guar. Co., 280 F.3d 1231 (9th Cir. 2002). “” Ariz.Rev.Stat. §§ 28-4135(A) & 28-4001(3).”

State v. Dustin (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 2× “See A.R.S. § 28-4135. Smith waited in his fully marked patrol vehicle a short distance away until a man exited the house, entered the Durango, and drove away.”

State Farm Auto. v. Jacey Lee Orlando (Ariz. 2025). · cites it 2× “Arizona’s Motor Vehicle Insurance Framework ¶14 In 1951, the legislature adopted the FRA to require minimum liability coverage for operators or owners of motor vehicles operating on public roads in Arizona.”

Jeffrey Odom v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Arizona (Ariz. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “” See A.R.S. § 28-4135(A) (requiring liability insurance for motor vehicles “operated on a highway in this state”).”

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 28-4135(A) — 4 cases

Odom v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Arizona, 169 P.3d 120 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2007). “” See A.R.S. § 28-4135(A) (requiring liability insurance for motor vehicles "operated on a highway in this state”).”

Jason W. Bills v. United States Fid. & Guar. Co., 280 F.3d 1231 (9th Cir. 2002). “” Ariz.Rev.Stat. §§ 28-4135(A) & 28-4001(3).”

State Farm Auto. v. Jacey Lee Orlando (Ariz. 2025). “Arizona’s Motor Vehicle Insurance Framework ¶14 In 1951, the legislature adopted the FRA to require minimum liability coverage for operators or owners of motor vehicles operating on public roads in Arizona.”

Jeffrey Odom v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Arizona (Ariz. Ct. App. 2007). “” See A.R.S. § 28-4135(A) (requiring liability insurance for motor vehicles “operated on a highway in this state”).”

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.