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

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 8-407 (2026)

Victim's discretion; form of statement

✓ 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 discretion to exercise the victim's rights under this article to be present and be heard at a court proceeding, and the absence of the victim at the court proceeding does not preclude the court from continuing the proceeding.

B. Except as provided in subsection C of this section, a victim's right to be heard may be exercised through an oral statement, submission of a written statement or submission of a statement through audiotape or videotape or any other video or digital media that is available to the court.

C. If a person against whom a delinquent act has been committed is in custody for an offense, the person may be heard by submitting a written statement to the court.

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases, 1983–1993 · leading case: Martinez v. Superior Court, La Paz Cnty., 731 P.2d 1244 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1987).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Martinez v. Superior Court, La Paz Cnty., 731 P.2d 1244 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 5× “(Emphasis added) In addition, A.R.S. § 8-407(A) (Supp.1986) states that a court may decline to exercise its jurisdiction at any time before making a decree if it finds that “it is an inconvenient forum to make a custody determination under the circumstances of the case but that…”
Iacouzze v. Iacouzze, 672 P.2d 949 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 4× “The reviewing court held that the trial court erred in its consideration of the factors contained in the parallel statute to A.R.S. § 8-407 C, dealing with an inconvenient forum.”
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. § 8-407. The latter statute permits, and the former statute requires, the court to communicate with the court of the other state to assure that the litigation will be conducted in the more appropriate forum.”
Tiscornia v. Tiscornia, 742 P.2d 1362 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 5× “Section 8-407(A) clearly provides that although an Arizona court may have jurisdiction, it may decline to exercise that jurisdiction under the doctrine of forum non conveniens.”
Lofts v. Superior Court, 682 P.2d 412 (Ariz. 1984). · cites it 2× “” These provisions complement UCCJA § 7 (A.R.S. § 8-407) which provides a method for a court to determine whether it is an inconvenient forum for the action and thus should allow another state to assume jurisdiction.”
Iacouzze v. Iacouzze, 672 P.2d 949 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 2× “It is true that the mother’s suitability to be the custodial parent is an important consideration, evidence of which is more easily obtained in Arizona.”
Ward v. Huggins, 865 P.2d 105 (Ariz. 1993). · cites it 6× “Once a court has determined its jurisdiction, it has discretion to decline to exercise it on the ground of inconvenient forum, AR.S. § 8-407, and it must decline to exercise it if simultaneous proceedings are pending in a court in another state, AR.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 8-407(A) — 2 cases
Martinez v. Superior Court, La Paz Cnty., 731 P.2d 1244 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1987). “(Emphasis added) In addition, A.R.S. § 8-407(A) (Supp.1986) states that a court may decline to exercise its jurisdiction at any time before making a decree if it finds that “it is an inconvenient forum to make a custody determination under the circumstances of the case but that…”
Tiscornia v. Tiscornia, 742 P.2d 1362 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1987). “Section 8-407(A) clearly provides that although an Arizona court may have jurisdiction, it may decline to exercise that jurisdiction under the doctrine of forum non conveniens.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 8-407(C) — 2 cases
Martinez v. Superior Court, La Paz Cnty., 731 P.2d 1244 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1987). “(Emphasis added) In addition, A.R.S. § 8-407(A) (Supp.1986) states that a court may decline to exercise its jurisdiction at any time before making a decree if it finds that “it is an inconvenient forum to make a custody determination under the circumstances of the case but that…”
Tiscornia v. Tiscornia, 742 P.2d 1362 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1987). “Section 8-407(A) clearly provides that although an Arizona court may have jurisdiction, it may decline to exercise that jurisdiction under the doctrine of forum non conveniens.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 8-407(C)(3) — 1 case
Martinez v. Superior Court, La Paz Cnty., 731 P.2d 1244 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1987). “(Emphasis added) In addition, A.R.S. § 8-407(A) (Supp.1986) states that a court may decline to exercise its jurisdiction at any time before making a decree if it finds that “it is an inconvenient forum to make a custody determination under the circumstances of the case but that…”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 8-407(D) — 1 case
Ward v. Huggins, 865 P.2d 105 (Ariz. 1993). “Once a court has determined its jurisdiction, it has discretion to decline to exercise it on the ground of inconvenient forum, AR.S. § 8-407, and it must decline to exercise it if simultaneous proceedings are pending in a court in another state, AR.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 8-407(H) — 1 case
Tiscornia v. Tiscornia, 742 P.2d 1362 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1987). “Section 8-407(A) clearly provides that although an Arizona court may have jurisdiction, it may decline to exercise that jurisdiction under the doctrine of forum non conveniens.”
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.