Ariz. Rev. Stat. » Title 31
Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 31-417 (2026)

Notification to board of parole violator; hearing; reimprisonment

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

At the meeting held at the state prison of the board of executive clemency next following the retaking of a paroled prisoner or an offender on community supervision, the board shall be notified that the prisoner or offender has been retaken. If the paroled prisoner or offender on community supervision has been returned to the prison, the paroled prisoner shall be given an opportunity to appear before the board, and the board may after an opportunity has been given, or in case the prisoner has not yet been returned, declare the parolee or offender on community supervision delinquent. The prisoner may be thereafter imprisoned in the prison for a period equal to the prisoner's unexpired maximum term of sentence at the time the parole was granted, unless sooner released or discharged.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases, 1972–2018 · leading case: Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471 (1972).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471 (1972). · cites it 2× “220 (1962); Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 31-417 (1956); Ark.”
State v. Wagstaff, 775 P.2d 1130 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 4× “A.R.S. § 31-417. If appellant violates a term and condition of lifetime parole, what are the consequences? He cannot be reimprisoned, because there will be no unexpired portion of his sentence to serve.”
Broadhead v. Arizona Bd. of Pardons & Paroles, 725 P.2d 744 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 13× “] A.R.S. § 31-417 is silent as to the meaning of “delinquent.”
Worth v. Bd. of Pardons & Paroles, 703 P.2d 1246 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 4× “The state's claim that Jordan is distinguishable because the court did not consider whether jail time could later be forfeited by the Board under A.R.S. § 31-417 does not persuade us. The relevant section of A.”
Kelley v. Arizona Dep't of Corr., 744 P.2d 3 (Ariz. 1987). · cites it 2× “In addition, the Board, pursuant to A.R.S. § 31-417 and this court’s decision in Baker v.”
State v. Rios, 817 P.2d 53 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 2× “” A.R.S. § 31-417. That certain period is not the same as a sentence imposed following the revocation *110 of probation; there, the actual sentence is imposed for the first time after revocation.”
Baker v. Arizona Bd. of Pardons & Paroles, 724 P.2d 33 (Ariz. 1986). · cites it 4× “We must decide a single issue: Can the Board of Pardons and Paroles forfeit “street time” of a parolee when he subsequently violates his parole and is reincarcerated? The statutory authority for the Board’s forfeiture of petitioner’s “street time” comes from A.”
Whitt v. State, Dep't of Corr., 497 P.2d 514 (Ariz. 1972). · cites it 2× “” And: “§ 31-417. Notification to board of parole violator; hearing; re-imprisonment “At the meeting held at the state prison of the board of pardons and paroles next following the retaking of a paroled prisoner, the board shall be notified that the prisoner has been retaken.”
Kelley v. Arizona Bd. of Pardons & Paroles, 762 P.2d 121 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 4× “If the paroled prisoner has been returned to the prison, he shall be given an opportunity to appear before the board, and the board may after opportunity has been given, or in case the prisoner has not yet been returned, declare the parolee delinquent.”
In re Nicholson, 561 P.2d 318 (Ariz. 1977). “Section 31-417.” The state has not informed us whether this hearing ever took place.”
Prince v. Adoc (Ariz. Ct. App. 2018). “”) section 31-417. Id. ¶5 In October 2013, the Board conducted a hearing on remand and declined to revoke Prince’s parole status.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 31-417(A) — 1 case
Broadhead v. Arizona Bd. of Pardons & Paroles, 725 P.2d 744 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1986). “] A.R.S. § 31-417 is silent as to the meaning of “delinquent.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 31-417(a) — 1 case
Baker v. Arizona Bd. of Pardons & Paroles, 724 P.2d 33 (Ariz. 1986). “We must decide a single issue: Can the Board of Pardons and Paroles forfeit “street time” of a parolee when he subsequently violates his parole and is reincarcerated? The statutory authority for the Board’s forfeiture of petitioner’s “street time” comes from 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.