Ariz. Rev. Stat. » Title 8
Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 8-207 (2026)

Order of adjudication; noncriminal; use as evidence

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

A. Except as provided by section 13-904, subsection H, section 13-2921.01, section 17-340 or sections 28-3304, 28-3306 and 28-3320, an order of the juvenile court in proceedings under this chapter shall not be deemed a conviction of crime, impose any civil disabilities ordinarily resulting from a conviction or operate to disqualify the juvenile in any civil service application or appointment.

B. The disposition of a juvenile in the juvenile court may not be used against the juvenile in any case or proceeding other than a criminal or juvenile case in any court, whether before or after reaching majority, except as provided by section 13-2921.01, section 17-340 or sections 28-3304, 28-3306 and 28-3320.

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 38 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1971–2021 · leading case: In Re the Appeal in Maricopa Cnty. Juv. Action Nos. JV-512600 & JV-512797, 930 P.2d 496 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1996).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In Re the Appeal in Maricopa Cnty. Juv. Action Nos. JV-512600 & JV-512797, 930 P.2d 496 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 5× “Section 8-207(0 provides: The disposition of a child in the juvenile court may not be used against the child in any case or proceeding in any court other than a juvenile court, whether before or after reaching majority, except as provided by § 28-444. The use of a juvenile’s DNA…”
State v. Morales, 630 P.2d 1015 (Ariz. 1981). · cites it 8× “The State, however, contended that A.R.S. § 8-207(C), which reads, "C. The disposition of a child in the juvenile court may not be used against the child in any case or proceeding in any court other than a juvenile court, whether before or after reaching majority, except in…”
In Re Shane B., 7 P.3d 94 (Ariz. 2000). · cites it 5× “See A.R.S. § 8-207. He maintains that under the statute, “first time felony juvenile offender” status is penal because it is a prerequisite to adjudication in adult court.”
David G. v. Pollard Ex Rel. Cnty. of Pima, 86 P.3d 364 (Ariz. 2004). · cites it 4× “A.R.S. § 8-207(A) (Supp.2003). Therefore, the application of the Rules of Criminal Procedure to a juvenile’s adjudication in a proceeding brought under A.”
State v. Rodriguez, 612 P.2d 484 (Ariz. 1980). · cites it 3× “That statute provides: “§ 8-207. Order of adjudication; noncriminal; use as evidence “C.”
State v. Furlong, 473 P.3d 707 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 8× “See generally A.R.S. § 8-207. While true, the effect of an adjudication on a juvenile may still be more than the effect of a set-aside conviction on an adult.”
State v. Myers, 570 P.2d 1252 (Ariz. 1977). · cites it 2× “1(a)(7), requires that the prosecutor make available to the defendant prior felony convictions of persons whom the prosecutor intends to use as witnesses at the trial, but A.R.S. § 8-207 states that the results of juvenile court proceedings are not convictions of crimes and that…”
State v. Corral, 521 P.2d 151 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1974). · cites it 12× “The policy of A.R.S. § 8-207 (O) is supported by A.R.S.”
State v. Morales, 587 P.2d 236 (Ariz. 1978). · cites it 2× “See also A.R.S. § 8-207. The defendant contends, however, that a state’s interest in preserving the anonymity *521 of juvenile offenders must give way to a criminal defendant’s interest in effectively cross-examining his accusers, citing Davis v.”
In Re the Appeal in Maricopa Cnty., Juv. Action No. J-85871, 584 P.2d 618 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1978). · cites it 5× “We are unable to see where as argued by appellant that these sections are authority to the Juvenile Court to step outside of its role as a juvenile court judge and *157 impose incarceration in jail contrary to A.R.S. § 8-207, supra. True, jail terms as conditions of probation…”
State v. Corona, 932 P.2d 1356 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 2× “These instructions adequately remedied any unfair prejudice from the testimony. We also reject the argument that the reference to the defendant’s arrests as a juvenile violated his right to privacy on juvenile matters safeguarded by A.”
State v. Beasley, 12 P.3d 234 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 19× “Defendant argued that the post-Proposition 102 version of that section, which permits the state to use a defendant’s juvenile court adjudications against him in a criminal case, could not be applied to him because the version of section 8-207 in effect at the time of his…”
Show all 38 citing cases →
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 8-207(A) — 10 cases
David G. v. Pollard Ex Rel. Cnty. of Pima, 86 P.3d 364 (Ariz. 2004). “A.R.S. § 8-207(A) (Supp.2003). Therefore, the application of the Rules of Criminal Procedure to a juvenile’s adjudication in a proceeding brought under A.”
In Re Casey G., 224 P.3d 1016 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2010).
In re Brittany Y., 147 P.3d 1047 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2006).
State v. Furlong, 473 P.3d 707 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2020). “See generally A.R.S. § 8-207. While true, the effect of an adjudication on a juvenile may still be more than the effect of a set-aside conviction on an adult.”
Matter of Appeal in Maricopa Cty., No. Jv-508801, 901 P.2d 1205 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1995).
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 8-207(B) — 7 cases
State v. Furlong, 473 P.3d 707 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2020). “See generally A.R.S. § 8-207. While true, the effect of an adjudication on a juvenile may still be more than the effect of a set-aside conviction on an adult.”
Gammons v. Berlat, 696 P.2d 700 (Ariz. 1985).
In Re Shane B., 7 P.3d 94 (Ariz. 2000). “See A.R.S. § 8-207. He maintains that under the statute, “first time felony juvenile offender” status is penal because it is a prerequisite to adjudication in adult court.”
In Re Anthony H., 994 P.2d 407 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1999).
State v. Beasley, 12 P.3d 234 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2000). “Defendant argued that the post-Proposition 102 version of that section, which permits the state to use a defendant’s juvenile court adjudications against him in a criminal case, could not be applied to him because the version of section 8-207 in effect at the time of his…”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 8-207(C) — 10 cases
State v. Morales, 630 P.2d 1015 (Ariz. 1981). “The State, however, contended that A.R.S. § 8-207(C), which reads, "C. The disposition of a child in the juvenile court may not be used against the child in any case or proceeding in any court other than a juvenile court, whether before or after reaching majority, except in…”
In Re the Appeal in Maricopa Cnty. Juv. Action Nos. JV-512600 & JV-512797, 930 P.2d 496 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1996). “Section 8-207(0 provides: The disposition of a child in the juvenile court may not be used against the child in any case or proceeding in any court other than a juvenile court, whether before or after reaching majority, except as provided by § 28-444. The use of a juvenile’s DNA…”
State v. Rodriguez, 612 P.2d 484 (Ariz. 1980). “That statute provides: “§ 8-207. Order of adjudication; noncriminal; use as evidence “C.”
State v. Corral, 521 P.2d 151 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1974). “The policy of A.R.S. § 8-207 (O) is supported by A.R.S.”
In Re Shane B., 7 P.3d 94 (Ariz. 2000). “See A.R.S. § 8-207. He maintains that under the statute, “first time felony juvenile offender” status is penal because it is a prerequisite to adjudication in adult court.”
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.