36-533. Petition for treatment
A. The petition for court-ordered treatment shall allege:
1. That the patient is in need of a period of treatment because the patient, as a result of mental disorder, is a danger to self or to others or has a persistent or acute disability or a grave disability.
2. The treatment alternatives that are appropriate or available.
3. That the patient is unwilling to accept or incapable of accepting treatment voluntarily.
B. The petition shall be accompanied by the affidavits of the two physicians who participated in the evaluation and by the affidavit of the applicant for the evaluation, if any. In a county with a population of less than five hundred thousand persons, the petition may be accompanied by the affidavits of one physician and either one physician assistant who is experienced in psychiatric matters or one psychiatric and mental health nurse practitioner who conducted an independent evaluation and by the affidavit of the applicant for the evaluation, if any. The affidavits of the physicians or other health professionals shall describe in detail the behavior that indicates that the person, as a result of mental disorder, is a danger to self or to others or has a persistent or acute disability or a grave disability and shall be based on the physician's or other health professional's observations of the patient and study of information about the patient. A summary of the facts that support the allegations of the petition shall be included. The affidavit shall also include any of the results of the physical examination of the patient if relevant to the patient's psychiatric condition.
C. The petition shall request the court to issue an order requiring the person to undergo a period of treatment. If a prosecutor filed a petition pursuant to section 13-4517, the petition must be accompanied by any known criminal history of the person and any previous findings of incompetency.
D. If the petition requests the court to determine that the patient is chronically resistant to treatment pursuant to section 36-550.09, the petition shall allege the facts that support the request.
E. The petition shall also include:
1. A statement that in the opinion of the petitioner the person does or does not require guardianship or conservatorship, or both, under title 14 and the reasons on which the statement is based.
2. A request that the court order an independent investigation and report for the court if in the opinion of the petitioner the person does require guardianship or conservatorship, or both.
3. A statement that in the opinion of the petitioner the person does or does not require temporary guardianship or conservatorship, or both, and the reasons on which the statement is based.
4. A request that the court appoint a temporary guardian or conservator, or both, if in the opinion of the petitioner the person does require temporary guardianship or conservatorship, or both.
5. If the person has an existing guardian, a statement identifying the existing guardian and a request that the court consider imposing additional duties on the existing guardian pursuant to section 14-5312.01.
F. If the petition contains a request for court action pursuant to subsection E of this section, a copy of the petition shall be mailed to any person or agency that is nominated as guardian or conservator or the person who is identified as an existing guardian.
G. A copy of all petitions shall be mailed to the superintendent of the Arizona state hospital.
H. On the filing of a petition for court-ordered treatment, if the patient is not detained in an evaluation agency when the petition is filed, the petition shall contain a statement of any facts and circumstances that lead the petitioner to believe that the proposed patient may be safely transported to the evaluation agency pursuant to section 36-535 by an authorized transporter, if available in the jurisdiction, without the assistance of a peace officer.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
72
cases (
15 in the last 5 years), 1980–2026 · leading case:
In re MH 2007-001236, 204 P.3d 418 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008).
In re MH 2007-001236, 204 P.3d 418 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008).
· cites it 18× “Cyriac’s affidavit and testimony failed to meet the statutory requirements under A.R.S. §§ 36-533 and -539. 4 Appellant argues that Dr.”
In Re Maricopa Cnty. Superior Court No. MH 2001-001139, 54 P.3d 380 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2002).
· cites it 13× “James filed a Petition for Court-Ordered Treatment (“petition for treatment”) pursuant to A.R.S. § 36-533. Affidavits from the physicians who participated in the evaluation, Dr.”
In Re Pinal Cnty. Mental Health No. Mh-201000029, 240 P.3d 1262 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2010).
· cites it 20× “Appellant contends there was insufficient evidence to support the order because neither of the two psychiatrists who examined him conducted an in-person, physical examination as required by A.R.S. §§ 36-533(B) and 36-539(B). For the reasons set forth below, we vacate the order.”
Heller v. Doe Ex Rel. Doe, 509 U.S. 312 (1993).
· cites it 2× “(1990) (mental illness); Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 36-533 et seq. (1986 and Supp.”
In re Maricopa Cnty. Superior Court No. MH 2003-000058, 84 P.3d 489 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 7× “1996) (“Given the liberty interests implicated in a court-ordered treatment proceeding, a more liberal reading of section 36-533 is precluded.”); MH 1425, 181 Ariz.”
In re MH 2006-000490, 154 P.3d 387 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2007).
· cites it 7× “Hadziah-metovic’s affidavit met the requirements of § 36-533. . Voluntary care for Appellant’s severe mental retardation could potentially be sought pursuant to A.”
In Re Mh2011-000914, 275 P.3d 611 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2012).
· cites it 5× “A petition for involuntary treatment shall be accompanied by the affidavits of the two physicians who conducted the examinations during the evaluation period____ The affidavits of the physicians shall describe in detail the behavior which indicates that the person, as a result…”
In re MH 2007-001275, 196 P.3d 819 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008).
· cites it 5× “See A.R.S. §§ 36-533(A)(2) and -540(A)(2) (2003).”
In re MH 2006-000023, 150 P.3d 1267 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2007).
· cites it 4× “pursuant to A.R.S. § 36-533 (2003). ¶ 3 On January 24, the trial court issued a detention order for treatment and notice of hearing on the petition for treatment.”
In re MH 2008-000438, 205 P.3d 1124 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2009).
· cites it 4× “In addition, because “a complete physical exam” is a part of the statutory definition of an “examination,” it too must be conducted personally.”
In Re Mh2015-003266, 382 P.3d 72 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016).
· cites it 4× “ation includes two statutorily defined facets: (1) the psychiatric portion, consisting of “[a] professional multidisciplinary analysis that may include firsthand observations or remote observations by interactive audiovisual media and that is based on data describing the…”
In re MH 2006-000749, 152 P.3d 1201 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2007).
· cites it 2× “” A.R.S. § 36-533(A) (2003). Given that the purpose of an involuntary treatment proceeding is to assess allegations that a person suffers from a serious mental disorder that so significantly affects her that she is unwilling or incapable of accepting treatment, the superior…”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 36-533(33) — 1 case
In re MH 2008-000438, 205 P.3d 1124 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2009).
“In addition, because “a complete physical exam” is a part of the statutory definition of an “examination,” it too must be conducted personally.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 36-533(A) — 9 cases
In re MH 2006-000749, 152 P.3d 1201 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2007).
“” A.R.S. § 36-533(A) (2003). Given that the purpose of an involuntary treatment proceeding is to assess allegations that a person suffers from a serious mental disorder that so significantly affects her that she is unwilling or incapable of accepting treatment, the superior…”
In re MH 2007-001236, 204 P.3d 418 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008).
“Cyriac’s affidavit and testimony failed to meet the statutory requirements under A.R.S. §§ 36-533 and -539. 4 Appellant argues that Dr.”
In re MH 2006-000490, 154 P.3d 387 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2007).
“Hadziah-metovic’s affidavit met the requirements of § 36-533. . Voluntary care for Appellant’s severe mental retardation could potentially be sought pursuant to A.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 36-533(A)(1) — 1 case
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 36-533(A)(2) — 6 cases
In re MH 2007-001236, 204 P.3d 418 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008).
“Cyriac’s affidavit and testimony failed to meet the statutory requirements under A.R.S. §§ 36-533 and -539. 4 Appellant argues that Dr.”
In re MH 2007-001275, 196 P.3d 819 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008).
“See A.R.S. §§ 36-533(A)(2) and -540(A)(2) (2003).”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 36-533(A)(3) — 4 cases
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 36-533(A)(l) — 3 cases
In re MH 2006-000490, 154 P.3d 387 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2007).
“Hadziah-metovic’s affidavit met the requirements of § 36-533. . Voluntary care for Appellant’s severe mental retardation could potentially be sought pursuant to A.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 36-533(B) — 35 cases
In Re Pinal Cnty. Mental Health No. Mh-201000029, 240 P.3d 1262 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2010).
“Appellant contends there was insufficient evidence to support the order because neither of the two psychiatrists who examined him conducted an in-person, physical examination as required by A.R.S. §§ 36-533(B) and 36-539(B). For the reasons set forth below, we vacate the order.”
In Re Maricopa Cnty. Superior Court No. MH 2001-001139, 54 P.3d 380 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2002).
“James filed a Petition for Court-Ordered Treatment (“petition for treatment”) pursuant to A.R.S. § 36-533. Affidavits from the physicians who participated in the evaluation, Dr.”
In re MH 2007-001236, 204 P.3d 418 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008).
“Cyriac’s affidavit and testimony failed to meet the statutory requirements under A.R.S. §§ 36-533 and -539. 4 Appellant argues that Dr.”
In Re Mh2011-000914, 275 P.3d 611 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2012).
“A petition for involuntary treatment shall be accompanied by the affidavits of the two physicians who conducted the examinations during the evaluation period____ The affidavits of the physicians shall describe in detail the behavior which indicates that the person, as a result…”
In Re Mh2015-003266, 382 P.3d 72 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016).
“ation includes two statutorily defined facets: (1) the psychiatric portion, consisting of “[a] professional multidisciplinary analysis that may include firsthand observations or remote observations by interactive audiovisual media and that is based on data describing the…”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 36-533(E) — 1 case
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.