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

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 8-291.01 (2026)

Effect of incompetency; request for examination

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

A. A juvenile shall not participate in a delinquency, incorrigibility or criminal proceeding if the court determines that the juvenile is incompetent to proceed.

B. At any time after the filing of a petition for delinquency or incorrigibility or a petition that seeks to transfer a juvenile to adult court, a party may request in writing or the court on its own motion may order that the juvenile be examined to determine if the juvenile is competent.  The request shall state the facts in support of the request for a competency examination. The presence of a mental illness, defect or disability alone is not grounds for finding a juvenile incompetent. The court shall not order a juvenile who is under the jurisdiction of the juvenile court to participate in a treatment program for the restoration of competency unless the court made a prior finding of probable cause pursuant to rule 3(f), rules of procedure for the juvenile court.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1998–2025 · leading case: In Re Charles B., 978 P.2d 659 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1998).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In Re Charles B., 978 P.2d 659 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 6× “A.R.S. § 8-291.01 (Supp.1997). If the court determines that a juvenile is restorable, the court shall order the juvenile to undergo an attempt at restoration within six months after the initial determination.”
In Re Eddie O., 253 P.3d 296 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 4× “A.R.S. § 8-291.01 (2007). On the basis of expert recommendations and other evidence from the parties, the court determines whether the juvenile is competent to proceed.”
In Re Eric W., 271 P.3d 486 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 4× “A juvenile determined to be "incompetent” is one "who does not have sufficient present ability to consult with the juvenile’s lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding or who does not have a rational and factual understanding of the proceedings against the…”
John Fitzgerald v. Hon. myers/state Ex Rel Brnovich (Ariz. 2017). · cites it 2× “§ 13-4502(A) (stating that “[a] person shall not be tried, convicted, sentenced or punished for an offense if the court determines that the person is incompetent to stand trial”); A.R.S. § 8-291.01(A) (stating that “[a] juvenile shall not participate in a delinquency,…”
E v. v. Hon. Abrams (Ariz. Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 2× “See generally §§ 8-291.01 through 8-291.11. A juvenile fitting the statutory criteria may be ordered to participate in a competency restoration program.”
In Re Adan R. (Ariz. Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 2× “” A.R.S. § 8-291.01(A). It is error when a court holds a proceeding for an incompetent juvenile.”
In Re Delinquency of J.U. (Ariz. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 8-291.01(B). If the court finds that the juvenile is incompetent but may be restored to competency, it shall order the juvenile to participate in restoration services—as the court did here.”
Alexandria M. v. McClennen, 167 P.3d 128 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 3× “First, Rule 17(B) excludes time for an examination and competency determination, and during any time the juvenile is incompetent.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 8-291.01(A) — 5 cases
In Re Eric W., 271 P.3d 486 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2012). “A juvenile determined to be "incompetent” is one "who does not have sufficient present ability to consult with the juvenile’s lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding or who does not have a rational and factual understanding of the proceedings against the…”
John Fitzgerald v. Hon. myers/state Ex Rel Brnovich (Ariz. 2017). “§ 13-4502(A) (stating that “[a] person shall not be tried, convicted, sentenced or punished for an offense if the court determines that the person is incompetent to stand trial”); A.R.S. § 8-291.01(A) (stating that “[a] juvenile shall not participate in a delinquency,…”
In Re Adan R. (Ariz. Ct. App. 2022). “” A.R.S. § 8-291.01(A). It is error when a court holds a proceeding for an incompetent juvenile.”
Alexandria M. v. McClennen, 167 P.3d 128 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2007). “First, Rule 17(B) excludes time for an examination and competency determination, and during any time the juvenile is incompetent.”
E v. v. Hon. Abrams (Ariz. Ct. App. 2022). “See generally §§ 8-291.01 through 8-291.11. A juvenile fitting the statutory criteria may be ordered to participate in a competency restoration program.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 8-291.01(B) — 3 cases
In Re Eddie O., 253 P.3d 296 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2011). “A.R.S. § 8-291.01 (2007). On the basis of expert recommendations and other evidence from the parties, the court determines whether the juvenile is competent to proceed.”
In Re Eric W., 271 P.3d 486 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2012). “A juvenile determined to be "incompetent” is one "who does not have sufficient present ability to consult with the juvenile’s lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding or who does not have a rational and factual understanding of the proceedings against the…”
In Re Delinquency of J.U. (Ariz. Ct. App. 2025). “A.R.S. § 8-291.01(B). If the court finds that the juvenile is incompetent but may be restored to competency, it shall order the juvenile to participate in restoration services—as the court did here.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 8-291.01(D) — 1 case
In Re Charles B., 978 P.2d 659 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1998). “A.R.S. § 8-291.01 (Supp.1997). If the court determines that a juvenile is restorable, the court shall order the juvenile to undergo an attempt at restoration within six months after the initial determination.”
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.