Arizona Revised Statutes
Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 31-443 (2026)
Power of governor to grant reprieves, commutations and pardons
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
AZ-LEGazleg.gov (official)
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
The governor, subject to any limitations provided by law, may grant reprieves, commutations and pardons, after conviction, for all offenses, except impeachment, upon conditions, restrictions and limitations he deems proper.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8
cases, 1962–2006 · leading case: State v. Berger, 134 P.3d 378 (Ariz. 2006).
State v. Berger, 134 P.3d 378 (Ariz. 2006). “A.R.S. § 31-443 (2002). In this case, however, the statute setting forth the sentence purports to preclude that remedy.”
Herrera v. Collins, 506 U.S. 390 (1993). “V, § 5, Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. §§ 31-443 , 31-445 (1986 and Supp.”
Ohio Adult Parole Auth. v. Woodard, 523 U.S. 272 (1998). “V, § 5, Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. §§ 31-443 , 31-445 (1996); Ark.”
Banks v. Arizona State Bd. of Pardons & Paroles, 629 P.2d 1035 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1981). “” This constitutional provision is reiterated in A.R.S. § 31-443. 2 The legislature has placed restrictions and limitations upon the Governor’s exercise of the power of commutation in A.”
State Ex Rel. Ariz. St. Bd. of P. & P. v. Superior Court of Maricopa Cnty., 467 P.2d 917 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1970). “” The constitutional provision is supplemented by A.R.S. § 31-443 which reads as follows: “§ 31-443.”
Arnold v. Arizona Bd. of Pardons & Paroles, 805 P.2d 388 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1990). “They appeal from the trial court’s ruling that the regulation does not violate the ex post fac-to clause. EX POST FACTO VIOLATION The governor has the power to commute prisoners’ sentences in accordance with conditions, restrictions, and limitations provided by law.”
McGee v. Arizona State Bd. of Pardons & Paroles, 376 P.2d 779 (Ariz. 1962). “Although the Governor may grant reprieves, commutations and pardons, A.R.S. § 31-443, it is the exclusive power of the Board to pass upon and recommend such arid they may not be granted by the Governor unless first so recommended by the Board, A.”
McDonald v. Thomas, 12 P.3d 1194 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2000). “5, § 5; A.R.S. § 31-443 (1996). Arizona's clemency system is unique, however, in that it delegates the majority of the decision-making power to the Board of Executive Clemency.”
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.