Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 41-1609 (2026)

Agreements with federal or private agencies and institutions; contract review; emergency contracts

✓ current as of May 2026

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

A. The department may enter into agreements with the federal government, other states or agencies of the federal government or other states for such compensation upon which they agree to accept or deliver adult offenders or to administer correctional programs. Notwithstanding the provisions of section 35-193, any funds received by the department under the agreements shall be kept in a separate revolving fund for current usage and shall not revert to the state general fund if unexpended at the close of a fiscal year.

B. The department may contract with any private or public institution that is located inside or outside this state for facilities or the operation of facilities that are dedicated to the confinement of persons who are committed to the department. Notwithstanding chapter 4, article 7 of this title and article 4 of this chapter, the contract may include a purchase option and if the contract has a per diem provision the contract may include a provision that allows a portion of the per diem to be applied to reduce the purchase price.

C. The department shall submit all contracts entered into pursuant to subsection B of this section to the attorney general to determine if the contract is within the authority granted under the laws of this state and in proper form. All contracts involving the detention or incarceration of adult offenders shall conform to the requirements of section 41-1609.01.

D. Notwithstanding subsection C of this section, the department may enter into emergency contracts pursuant to section 41-2537 with private or public institutions for facilities or the operation of facilities that are dedicated to the confinement of persons who are committed to the department.

E. The director may declare an emergency for acts of God, natural catastrophes, prison riots and overcrowding. In an emergency, the director shall:

1. Confine persons who are committed to the department in either of the following:

(a) An existing public institution.

(b) A private institution that is described in subsection B of this section.

2. Up to twenty-four hours before declaring the emergency, notify the governor and the attorney general of the emergency and the need to relocate persons who are committed to the department to another existing public or private facility established pursuant to sections 41-1609.01 and 41-1609.02.

3. Within thirty days after declaring the emergency, determine the length of the emergency confinement. If the director determines that the emergency confinement will exceed six months in duration, the emergency contract shall comply with sections 41-1609.01 and 41-1609.02.

F. Notwithstanding subsection E, paragraph 2 of this section, if the director declares that an emergency exists due to the overcrowding of a public or private correctional facility, the director shall discuss with the governor, the attorney general and the majority and minority leadership in the senate and the house of representatives relocating the inmates from the overcrowded facility to another facility before relocating the inmates.

G. An emergency contract shall not exceed one year in duration.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 6 cases, 1979–1998 · leading case: In Re the Appeal in Maricopa Cnty. Juv. Action No. J-86715, 594 P.2d 554 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1979).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

In Re the Appeal in Maricopa Cnty. Juv. Action No. J-86715, 594 P.2d 554 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1979). · cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 41-1609(C). Since a delinquent child may be committed to a state institution, it is clear that in delinquency proceedings minimal due process guarantees must be afforded the juvenile.”

Arizona Dep't of Econ. Sec. v. Ciana H., 955 P.2d 977 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 2× “See A.R.S. § 41-1609 (allowing DOC to enter into contracts with private facilities for incarceration).”

Am. Fed'n of State, Cnty. & Mun. Employees v. Lewis, 797 P.2d 6 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 4× “I have been designated by the Director of DOC to perform the preliminary work necessary to implement the 1987 Legislative Amendment to A.R.S. § 41-1609 and the adoption of A.R.”

In Re the Appeal in Maricopa Cnty. Juv. Action No. J-90110, 621 P.2d 298 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1980). · cites it 2× “To this end, the legislature has given the State Department of Corrections the authority to assign the juvenile to an appropriate institution based upon a diagnostic evaluation and the further authority to give the juvenile an absolute discharge or a conditional release when it…”

In re the Appeal in Maricopa Cnty. Juv. No. J-86509, 604 P.2d 644 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1979). · cites it 2× “That rehabilitation and a flat, determinate sentence are basically incompatible is too obvious to merit comment.”

State v. Graves, 932 P.2d 289 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 2× “Appellant’s incarceration having ended more than five years prior to any of his current offenses, his class 5 prior felony conviction does not fall within the time period prescribed by A.”

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 41-1609(C) — 3 cases

In Re the Appeal in Maricopa Cnty. Juv. Action No. J-86715, 594 P.2d 554 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1979). “A.R.S. § 41-1609(C). Since a delinquent child may be committed to a state institution, it is clear that in delinquency proceedings minimal due process guarantees must be afforded the juvenile.”

In Re the Appeal in Maricopa Cnty. Juv. Action No. J-90110, 621 P.2d 298 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1980). “To this end, the legislature has given the State Department of Corrections the authority to assign the juvenile to an appropriate institution based upon a diagnostic evaluation and the further authority to give the juvenile an absolute discharge or a conditional release when it…”

In re the Appeal in Maricopa Cnty. Juv. No. J-86509, 604 P.2d 644 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1979). “That rehabilitation and a flat, determinate sentence are basically incompatible is too obvious to merit comment.”

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 41-1609(D)(3) — 1 case

State v. Graves, 932 P.2d 289 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1996). “Appellant’s incarceration having ended more than five years prior to any of his current offenses, his class 5 prior felony conviction does not fall within the time period prescribed by 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.