Ariz. Rev. Stat. » Title 36
Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 36-538 (2026)

Independent evaluator

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

At all hearings conducted pursuant to sections 36-539, 36-543 and 36-546, a person has the right to have an analysis of the person's mental condition by an independent evaluator.  If the person is unable to afford an evaluation, the court shall appoint an independent evaluator acceptable to the patient from a list of physicians, psychiatric and mental health nurse practitioners with sufficient relevant experience as determined by the medical director and psychologists who are willing to accept court-appointed evaluations.

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1966–2026 · leading case: In re MH 2008-001188, 211 P.3d 1161 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2009).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In re MH 2008-001188, 211 P.3d 1161 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 2× “The statute, however, does not mandate that the evaluating physicians allege that the patient is unable or unwilling to accept voluntary treatment.”
In Re the Commitment of an Alleged Mentally Disordered Person, 889 P.2d 1088 (Ariz. 1995). · cites it 2× “Petitioner requested an additional examination by an independent mental health professional, as permitted by A.R.S. § 36-538. The psychologist performing that examination testified at the hearing.”
Arizona Podiatry Ass'n v. Dir. of Ins., 422 P.2d 108 (Ariz. 1966). · cites it 2× “Mental Health § 36-538 19. State Bd. of Equalization § 42-147, subsec.”
In re MH 2007-000937, 189 P.3d 1090 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 2× “Rather, the agency, through its deputy medical director, after successfully petitioning the *523 court for evaluation, initiated this case by filing a petition for treatment pursuant to A.R.S. § 36-538. E.M. is not a party to this case.”
In re the Appeal in Pima Cnty. Mental Health Serv. Action No. MH-2116-1, 757 P.2d 118 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 2× “§ 36-537(B) nor told him of his right to an independent evaluator under A.R.S. § 36-538. The trial attorney filed a controverting affidavit.”
In Re: Mh 2025-004813 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2026). · cites it 2× “was not (as he argues on appeal) “deprived of a full opportunity to exercise his right to an independent evaluator” under A.R.S. § 36-538. In fact, even with notice of ECT use, J.”
Matter of Pima Cty. Mental Health Serv., 757 P.2d 118 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 2× “§ 36-537(B) nor told him of his right to an independent evaluator under A.R.S. § 36-538. The trial attorney filed a controverting affidavit.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 36-538(B) — 1 case
In re MH 2008-001188, 211 P.3d 1161 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2009). “The statute, however, does not mandate that the evaluating physicians allege that the patient is unable or unwilling to accept voluntary treatment.”
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.