Ariz. Rev. Stat. » Title 31

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 31-225

Attendance of prisoner in court

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

When it is necessary that a person imprisoned by the department be brought before any court, or that a person imprisoned in a county jail be brought before a court in another county, an order may be made for that purpose by the court and executed by the sheriff of the county where the order is made.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 2001–2013 · leading case: State of Arizona v. Brandon Albert Seay
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State of Arizona v. Brandon Albert Seay (2013) arizctapp · cites it 2× “2d 64, 66 (1965); see also A.R.S. § 31-225. 4 . At that time, a defendant was not necessarily entitled to presentence incarceration credit, and whether to award such credit was left to the trial court’s discretion.”
State ex rel. Arizona Department of Corrections v. Kiger (2010) arizctapp · cites it 12× “ADOC then filed this special action in which it contends that the superior court exceeded its authority because A.R.S. § 31-225 requires that the local county sheriff execute all transport orders arising out of superior court proceedings.”
Trombi v. Donahoe (2009) arizctapp · cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 31-225 (2002) also provides for the transport of state prisoners by the sheriff upon order of the court.”
Arpaio v. Steinle (2001) arizctapp · cites it 16× “[1] Also, the petition raises a pure question of law regarding the meaning of A.R.S. § 31-225. That issue is an important one that, having now been raised, appears likely to keep arising until it is resolved.”
STATE EX REL. DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS v. Kiger (2010) arizctapp · cites it 12× “ADOC then filed this special action in which it contends that the superior court exceeded its authority because A.R.S. § 31-225 requires that the local county sheriff execute all transport orders arising out of superior court proceedings.”
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.