Ariz. Rev. Stat. » Title 28
Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 28-446 (2026)

Fees for copies; exemptions

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

A. The department may furnish information from the records that are required to be kept by this title or may furnish copies from the records.  The department may charge a fee for providing the information or copies that does not exceed three dollars for each item.

B. The department shall not charge any of the following for copies of records, for certified copies of records or for information furnished from its records:

1. This state or its departments, agencies or political subdivisions.

2. A court.

3. The federal government or its agencies.

4. A law enforcement agency in a foreign country.

5. A toll operator as defined in section 28-7751.

C. The department shall furnish either of the following to any person on payment of a fee of five dollars:

1. Certified copies of public records designated pursuant to section 28-447.

2. Vehicle title history information.

D. This section does not apply to information required by law to be kept confidential or to statistical information, the purpose of which relates to traffic accidents, traffic offenses or traffic enforcement.

E. The director shall deposit, pursuant to sections 35-146 and 35-147, fees collected under this section in the Arizona highway user revenue fund.

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 36 cases, 1964–2003 · leading case: State v. Jennings, 722 P.2d 258 (Ariz. 1986).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Jennings, 722 P.2d 258 (Ariz. 1986). · cites it 24× “§ 28-445, providing for mandatory revocation based upon a conviction of certain crimes, and the other, A.R.S. § 28-446, providing for discretionary revocation—indicate the legislative intent.”
State v. Birmingham, 390 P.2d 103 (Ariz. 1964). · cites it 8× “By A.R.S. § 28-446 (as amended), the highway department is permitted to suspend licenses in certain instances.”
State v. Parra, 580 P.2d 339 (Ariz. 1978). · cites it 16× “We must answer only one question on appeal: Does A.R.S. § 28-446(A)(8), which authorizes the ex parte, discretionary suspension of a driver's license for one previous conviction of driving while intoxicated, violate procedural due process guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment…”
O'Hara v. Superior Ct. of State of Ariz., 674 P.2d 310 (Ariz. 1983). · cites it 11× “02(B) says “[t]he suspension, cancellation, revocation or refusal of an operator’s or chauffeur’s license is effective as provided in § 28-446.”
Goulder v. Arizona Dept. of Transp., Motor Veh., 868 P.2d 997 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 5× “section 28-446, the permissive revocation statute.”
State v. Gonzales, 80 P.3d 276 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 4× “§ 28-445, dealing with mandatory suspensions and revocations, and A.R.S. § 28-446, dealing with discretionary suspensions and revocations.”
Campbell v. Chatwin, 428 P.2d 108 (Ariz. 1967). · cites it 6× “On June 15, 1966 the Bureau of Driver Licensing, Division of Motor Vehicles of the State Highway Department issued, pursuant to A.R.S. § 28-446, subsec. A(3), and without prior notice an order of suspension on the driver’s license of the third party here, Mr.”
Forino v. Arizona Dep't of Transp., 952 P.2d 315 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 4× “The first of these statutes provides: All hearings requested under this section shall be conducted in the same manner and the same conditions as provided in § 28-446, subsection B. A.R.S. section 28~446(B) states in pertinent part: Upon the person’s request the department shall…”
Martin v. Super. Ct. in & for Cty. of Maricopa, 660 P.2d 859 (Ariz. 1983). · cites it 5× “We have also held that A.R.S. § 28-446, prescribing license revocation suspension hearings, is not unconstitutional.”
State v. Agee, 887 P.2d 588 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 6× “Arizona Revised Statute section 28-446 addresses discretionary license revocation and A.”
Traylor v. Thorneycroft, 657 P.2d 895 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1982). · cites it 4× “A.R.S. § 28-446(B), as amended, provides that the licensee upon his request, shall be afforded an opportunity for a hearing as early as practical within, but not to exceed 30 days after receipt of the request.”
State v. Johnston, 731 P.2d 638 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 4× “In Arizona, for example, receipt of information from another state pursuant to the Compact permits Arizona to suspend a person’s license upon a showing by records or other sufficient evidence that the licensee had committed an offense in another state which if committed in this…”
Show all 36 citing cases →
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 28-446(A) — 1 case
Chavez v. Campbell, 397 F. Supp. 1285 (D. Ariz. 1973).
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 28-446(A)(1) — 1 case
State v. Jennings, 722 P.2d 334 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1985).
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 28-446(A)(2) — 1 case
O'Hara v. Superior Ct. of State of Ariz., 674 P.2d 310 (Ariz. 1983). “02(B) says “[t]he suspension, cancellation, revocation or refusal of an operator’s or chauffeur’s license is effective as provided in § 28-446.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 28-446(A)(3) — 1 case
State v. Gin, 761 P.2d 1106 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1988).
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 28-446(A)(7) — 3 cases
Goulder v. Arizona Dept. of Transp., Motor Veh., 868 P.2d 997 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1994). “section 28-446, the permissive revocation statute.”
State v. Johnston, 731 P.2d 638 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1987). “In Arizona, for example, receipt of information from another state pursuant to the Compact permits Arizona to suspend a person’s license upon a showing by records or other sufficient evidence that the licensee had committed an offense in another state which if committed in this…”
Goulder v. Arizona Dep't of Transp., 868 P.2d 997 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1993).
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 28-446(A)(8) — 2 cases
State v. Parra, 580 P.2d 339 (Ariz. 1978). “We must answer only one question on appeal: Does A.R.S. § 28-446(A)(8), which authorizes the ex parte, discretionary suspension of a driver's license for one previous conviction of driving while intoxicated, violate procedural due process guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment…”
Montgomery v. North Carolina Dep't of Motor Vehs., 455 F. Supp. 338 (W.D.N.C. 1978).
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 28-446(A)(9) — 3 cases
Kellum v. Thorneycroft, Etc., 649 P.2d 994 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1982).
Murray v. Thorneycroft ex rel. Arizona High. Dep't Motor Veh. Div., 639 P.2d 346 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1981).
Murray v. Thorneycroft Ex Rel. Arizona, Etc., 639 P.2d 346 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1981).
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 28-446(B) — 12 cases
State v. Jennings, 722 P.2d 258 (Ariz. 1986). “§ 28-445, providing for mandatory revocation based upon a conviction of certain crimes, and the other, A.R.S. § 28-446, providing for discretionary revocation—indicate the legislative intent.”
Forino v. Arizona Dep't of Transp., 952 P.2d 315 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1997). “The first of these statutes provides: All hearings requested under this section shall be conducted in the same manner and the same conditions as provided in § 28-446, subsection B. A.R.S. section 28~446(B) states in pertinent part: Upon the person’s request the department shall…”
State v. Parra, 580 P.2d 339 (Ariz. 1978). “We must answer only one question on appeal: Does A.R.S. § 28-446(A)(8), which authorizes the ex parte, discretionary suspension of a driver's license for one previous conviction of driving while intoxicated, violate procedural due process guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment…”
Martin v. Super. Ct. in & for Cty. of Maricopa, 660 P.2d 859 (Ariz. 1983). “We have also held that A.R.S. § 28-446, prescribing license revocation suspension hearings, is not unconstitutional.”
State v. Agee, 887 P.2d 588 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1994). “Arizona Revised Statute section 28-446 addresses discretionary license revocation and A.”
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.