A. The state department of corrections shall maintain a master record file on each person who is committed to the department that contains the following:
1. All information from the committing court.
2. The reports of the reception-diagnostic centers.
3. Evaluation and assignment reports and recommendations.
4. Reports of disciplinary infractions and their disposition.
5. Progress reports prepared for the board of executive clemency and the department.
6. Parole or community supervision progress reports.
7. The date and circumstances of final discharge.
8. Any other pertinent data concerning the person's background, conduct, associations and life history as may be required by the department with a view to the person's reformation and to the protection of society.
B. All public agencies shall make available to the department, on request, any factual data in their possession regarding individuals committed to the department.
C. All records of prisoner care and custody are subject to title 39, chapter 1, article 2, except that the department shall not disclose records or portions of records:
1. Revealing the identity of a confidential informant.
2. Endangering the life or physical safety of a person.
3. Jeopardizing an ongoing criminal investigation.
D. A prisoner may view the prisoner's own automated summary record file, excluding those categories listed in subsection C.
E. Except as provided in subsection D, a prisoner shall not have access to any prisoner records other than viewing the prisoner's own automated summary record file and shall not assist in the preparation or reproduction of reports contained in those records.
F. A prisoner shall not make a request to view a copy of the prisoner's own automated summary record file more than one time each year, except that a prisoner who is scheduled for more than one hearing before the board of executive clemency in a calendar year may make a request to view before each hearing a copy of the prisoner's own automated summary record file.
G. For the purposes of this section, "automated summary record file" means a computer printout or generated image that includes the prisoner's:
1. Sentencing and release date calculations.
2. Institutional movements.
3. Disciplinary and rule violations.
4. Detainers and warrants.
5. Institutional work or job history.
6. Classification actions.
7. Board of executive clemency hearing actions.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
16
cases (
2 in the last 5 years), 1969–2022 · leading case:
State v. Williams, 698 P.2d 678 (Ariz. 1985).
State v. Williams, 698 P.2d 678 (Ariz. 1985).
· cites it 22× “The above statement and attached documents are from official records of the Arizona Department of Corrections, issued in accordance with the provisions of ARS 31-221. The document was admitted over defendant's objection.”
Berry v. State, Dept. of Corr., 699 P.2d 387 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1985).
· cites it 16× “Prison officials denied Berry access to his master record file pursuant to A.R.S. § 31-221 et seq. After exhausting all of the administrative remedies available to him, Berry brought an action against the State in Superior Court; this appeal follows the dismissal of Berry’s…”
Arizona Bd. of Regents v. Phoenix Newspapers, Inc., 806 P.2d 348 (Ariz. 1991).
· cites it 4× “§ 49-928; all records of "prisoner care and custody" are specifically subject to the Public *261 Records Law, with certain exceptions, A.R.S. § 31-221(C); and architects' application transcripts, letters of inquiry, references, and investigation files of any pending…”
State v. Trujillo, 257 P.3d 1194 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2011).
· cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 31-221 (2002) ("The state department of corrections shall maintain a master record file on each person who is committed to the department[.”
State v. Piedra, 583 P.2d 1373 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1978).
· cites it 8× “The appellant objected to the admission of the document on three grounds: (1) it contained records which were not required to be kept by a public officer; (2) its use by the prosecution violated the confidentiality provision of A.R.S. § 31-221 C; and (3) the exhibit was not…”
State v. Morales, 630 P.2d 1015 (Ariz. 1981).
· cites it 4× “* * *" A.R.S. § 31-221. We do not believe that this section prevents the use of information in such file over legitimate impeachment purposes.”
State of Arizona v. Javier Solis, 338 P.3d 982 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014).
· cites it 2× “Disposition ¶ 25 For the foregoing reasons, we vacate Solis’s convictions and sentences for driving with a BAC of .”
Ford v. State, 979 P.2d 10 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1999).
· cites it 2× “01(H) (prescriptions, medication, prosthetic devices); A.R.S. § 31-221(G) (1996) (copies of personal records); A.”
State v. Black, 494 P.2d 1332 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1972).
· cites it 2× “Rangel, supra, the records kept at the prison are those required to be kept by the secretary of the prison under A.R.S. § 31-221, which reads in pertinent part as follows : “The secretary for the prison shall keep a register of prisoners.”
Dennison v. Adoc (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016).
· cites it 14× “See A.R.S. §§ 31-221; 39-121. After discovery and motion practice, the superior court granted ADC’s motion for summary judgment, noting A.”
Reed v. Trinity Servs. Grp. Inc. (D. Ariz. 2022).
· cites it 13× “); A.R.S. §31-221. Replying, Plaintiff stated that 15 although the Assistant Attorney General representing the DOC “claims that .”
State v. Smith, 469 P.2d 838 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1970).
· cites it 2× “Certification of the exhibit by the Secretary of Arizona State Prison is condemned by the appellant.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 31-221(A) — 2 cases
State v. Williams, 698 P.2d 678 (Ariz. 1985).
“The above statement and attached documents are from official records of the Arizona Department of Corrections, issued in accordance with the provisions of ARS 31-221. The document was admitted over defendant's objection.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 31-221(A)(8) — 1 case
State v. Williams, 698 P.2d 678 (Ariz. 1985).
“The above statement and attached documents are from official records of the Arizona Department of Corrections, issued in accordance with the provisions of ARS 31-221. The document was admitted over defendant's objection.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 31-221(C) — 5 cases
Arizona Bd. of Regents v. Phoenix Newspapers, Inc., 806 P.2d 348 (Ariz. 1991).
“§ 49-928; all records of "prisoner care and custody" are specifically subject to the Public *261 Records Law, with certain exceptions, A.R.S. § 31-221(C); and architects' application transcripts, letters of inquiry, references, and investigation files of any pending…”
Dennison v. Adoc (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016).
“See A.R.S. §§ 31-221; 39-121. After discovery and motion practice, the superior court granted ADC’s motion for summary judgment, noting A.”
Reed v. Trinity Servs. Grp. Inc. (D. Ariz. 2022).
“); A.R.S. §31-221. Replying, Plaintiff stated that 15 although the Assistant Attorney General representing the DOC “claims that .”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 31-221(D) — 3 cases
Berry v. State, Dept. of Corr., 699 P.2d 387 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1985).
“Prison officials denied Berry access to his master record file pursuant to A.R.S. § 31-221 et seq. After exhausting all of the administrative remedies available to him, Berry brought an action against the State in Superior Court; this appeal follows the dismissal of Berry’s…”
Dennison v. Adoc (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016).
“See A.R.S. §§ 31-221; 39-121. After discovery and motion practice, the superior court granted ADC’s motion for summary judgment, noting A.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 31-221(E) — 3 cases
Dennison v. Adoc (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016).
“See A.R.S. §§ 31-221; 39-121. After discovery and motion practice, the superior court granted ADC’s motion for summary judgment, noting A.”
Reed v. Trinity Servs. Grp. Inc. (D. Ariz. 2022).
“); A.R.S. §31-221. Replying, Plaintiff stated that 15 although the Assistant Attorney General representing the DOC “claims that .”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 31-221(G) — 2 cases
Ford v. State, 979 P.2d 10 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1999).
“01(H) (prescriptions, medication, prosthetic devices); A.R.S. § 31-221(G) (1996) (copies of personal records); A.”
Dennison v. Adoc (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016).
“See A.R.S. §§ 31-221; 39-121. After discovery and motion practice, the superior court granted ADC’s motion for summary judgment, noting A.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 31-221(c) — 1 case
Reed v. Trinity Servs. Grp. Inc. (D. Ariz. 2022).
“); A.R.S. §31-221. Replying, Plaintiff stated that 15 although the Assistant Attorney General representing the DOC “claims that .”
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.