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

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 8-406 (2026)

Probation modification, revocation disposition or termination proceedings

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

A. The victim has the right to be present and be heard at any probation revocation disposition proceeding or any proceeding in which the court is requested to terminate the probation or intensive probation of a delinquent who committed a delinquent act against the victim.

B. The victim has the right to be heard at any proceeding in which the court is requested to modify the terms of probation or intensive probation of a delinquent if the modification will substantially affect the delinquent's contact with or safety of the victim or if the modification involves restitution or incarceration status.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases, 1984–2000 · leading case: J.D.S. v. Franks, 893 P.2d 732 (Ariz. 1995).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
J.D.S. v. Franks, 893 P.2d 732 (Ariz. 1995). · cites it 12× “See A.R.S. § 8-406; see also F.S.A. § 61.1308.”
Jds v. Superior Crt., Cnty. of Maricopa, 893 P.2d 749 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 12× “UCCJA § 6; A.R.S. § 8-406; F.S.A. § 61.1306. [9] Although I decline to accept jurisdiction in this proceeding, I candidly admit that the limited record before this court presents a strong position in favor of the father.”
In Re the Appeal in Yavapai Cnty. Juv. Action No. J-8545, 680 P.2d 146 (Ariz. 1984). · cites it 2× “§ 8-406(A) (“A court of this state shall not exercise its jurisdiction under [the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act] if at the time of filing the petition a proceeding concerning the custody of the child was pending in a court of another state exercising jurisdiction…”
In Re the Appeal in Pima Cnty. Juv. Action No. J-78632, 711 P.2d 1200 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 8-406(A). Further, the court may decline to exercise jurisdiction if it finds that the court of another state is a more appropriate forum.”
Lofts v. Superior Court, 682 P.2d 412 (Ariz. 1984). · cites it 2× “Respondent points to UCCJA § 6(b) (A.R.S. § 8-406(B)) which provides in part “Before hearing the petition____ [i]f the court has reason to believe that proceedings may be pending in another state it shall direct an inquiry to the state court administrator or other appropriate…”
In Re Alton D., 994 P.2d 402 (Ariz. 2000). · cites it 2× “See A.R.S. § 8-406. We find it significant that the legislature drew this distinction.”
Ward v. Huggins, 865 P.2d 105 (Ariz. 1993). · cites it 2× “§ 8-407, and it must decline to exercise it if simultaneous proceedings are pending in a court in another state, AR.S. § 8-406. Evidence of inconvenient forum or existence of simultaneous proceedings in this case is insufficient to support a declination to exercise as ordered by…”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 8-406(A) — 4 cases
J.D.S. v. Franks, 893 P.2d 732 (Ariz. 1995). “See A.R.S. § 8-406; see also F.S.A. § 61.1308.”
In Re the Appeal in Yavapai Cnty. Juv. Action No. J-8545, 680 P.2d 146 (Ariz. 1984). “§ 8-406(A) (“A court of this state shall not exercise its jurisdiction under [the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act] if at the time of filing the petition a proceeding concerning the custody of the child was pending in a court of another state exercising jurisdiction…”
In Re the Appeal in Pima Cnty. Juv. Action No. J-78632, 711 P.2d 1200 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1985). “A.R.S. § 8-406(A). Further, the court may decline to exercise jurisdiction if it finds that the court of another state is a more appropriate forum.”
Jds v. Superior Crt., Cnty. of Maricopa, 893 P.2d 749 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1994). “UCCJA § 6; A.R.S. § 8-406; F.S.A. § 61.1306. [9] Although I decline to accept jurisdiction in this proceeding, I candidly admit that the limited record before this court presents a strong position in favor of the father.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 8-406(B) — 1 case
Lofts v. Superior Court, 682 P.2d 412 (Ariz. 1984). “Respondent points to UCCJA § 6(b) (A.R.S. § 8-406(B)) which provides in part “Before hearing the petition____ [i]f the court has reason to believe that proceedings may be pending in another state it shall direct an inquiry to the state court administrator or other appropriate…”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 8-406(C) — 1 case
J.D.S. v. Franks, 893 P.2d 732 (Ariz. 1995). “See A.R.S. § 8-406; see also F.S.A. § 61.1308.”
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.