8-821. Taking into temporary custody; medical examination; forensic interview; placement; interference; violation; classification; definition
A. A child shall be taken into temporary custody only pursuant to one of the following:
1. An order of the superior court.
2. Subsection E of this section.
3. The consent of the child's parent or guardian.
B. The superior court, on a dependency petition filed by an interested person, a peace officer, a child welfare investigator or a child safety worker under oath or on a sworn statement or testimony by a peace officer, a child welfare investigator or a child safety worker, may issue an order authorizing the department to take temporary custody of a child on finding that probable cause exists to believe that temporary custody is clearly necessary to protect the child from suffering abuse or neglect and it is contrary to the child's welfare to remain in the home.
C. If a child is taken into temporary custody pursuant to this section, the child's sibling shall also be taken into temporary custody only if independent probable cause exists to believe that temporary custody is clearly necessary to protect the child from suffering abuse or neglect.
D. If a child is taken into temporary custody pursuant to this section, the court shall order the department to initiate a due diligence search pursuant to section 8-514.07.
E. A child may be taken into temporary custody without a court order by a peace officer, a child welfare investigator or a child safety worker if temporary custody is clearly necessary to protect the child because exigent circumstances exist.
F. In determining if a child should be taken into temporary custody, the court, peace officer, child welfare investigator or child safety worker shall take into consideration as a paramount concern the child's health and safety.
G. A person who takes a child into custody because an exigent circumstance described in subsection L, paragraph 2 of this section exists shall immediately have the child forensically interviewed by a person who is trained in forensic interviewing pursuant to a protocol established pursuant to section 8-817 and may have the child examined by a physician who is licensed pursuant to title 32, chapter 13 or 17 or a health care provider who is licensed pursuant to title 32 and who has specific training in evaluations of child abuse. After the interview or examination, or both, the person shall release the child to the custody of the parent or guardian of the child unless the interview or examination reveals abuse. Temporary custody of a child taken into custody because an exigent circumstance described in subsection L, paragraph 2 of this section exists shall not exceed twelve hours.
H. A child who is taken into temporary custody pursuant to this article shall not be held in a police station, jail or lockup where adults or juveniles who are charged with or convicted of a crime are detained.
I. A child shall not remain in temporary custody for more than seventy-two hours excluding Saturdays, Sundays and holidays unless a dependency petition is filed.
J. To execute an order authorizing temporary custody, a peace officer may use reasonable force to enter any building in which the person named in the removal authorization is or is reasonably believed to be.
K. A person who knowingly interferes with the taking of a child into temporary custody under this section is guilty of a class 2 misdemeanor.
L. For the purposes of this section, "exigent circumstances" means there is probable cause to believe that the child is likely to suffer serious harm in the time it would take to obtain a court order for removal and either of the following is true:
1. There is no less intrusive alternative to taking temporary custody of the child that would reasonably and sufficiently protect the child's health or safety.
2. Probable cause exists to believe that the child is a victim of sexual abuse or abuse involving serious physical injury that can be diagnosed only by a physician who is licensed pursuant to title 32, chapter 13 or 17 or a health care provider who is licensed pursuant to title 32 and who has specific training in evaluations of child abuse.
Notes of Decisions
Tinsley v. McKay (2015)
azd · cites it 8×
“10 See *1034 A.R.S. § 8-821. While the six-month status reviews only take place if a child has been determined dependent by the juvenile court.”
Marina P. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security (2007)
arizctapp · cites it 2×
“” A.R.S. § 8-821(B)(l). That Mother is attempting to evade detection and deportation does not, in and of itself, create probable cause to believe her children are in imminent danger of abuse or neglect.”
Willie G. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security (2005)
arizctapp · cites it 2×
“We decline to hold that the error in labeling the petition invalidated the juvenile court’s attendant order authorizing CPS to take Nykole into custody pursuant to the general authority conferred by A.R.S. § 8-821. ¶ 11 Like Arizona, Texas also has adopted the UCCJEA, Tex.”
B.K. v. Thomas Betlach (2019)
ca9
“” ARS § 8-821(A), (D). DCS may also petition to commence dependency proceedings in Arizona state court by alleging that a child is dependent.”
Allen v. Chon-Lopez (2007)
arizctapp · cites it 4×
“was "a victim or [would] imminently become a victim of abuse or neglect," or "suffering serious physical or emotional injury that can only be diagnosed by a medical doctor or psychologist.”
Arizona Department of Economic Security v. Bernini (2002)
arizctapp · cites it 4×
“§ 8-824 and review of taking a child into temporary custody pursuant to A.R.S. § 8-821. Because the respondent judge applied ICWA, she required ADES to establish by clear and convincing evidence 1 rather than a preponderance that the continued removal of Noah J.”
Chatman v. Ferrell (2020)
azd · cites it 28×
“) Nevertheless, Defendants argued that they are 17 not liable for false imprisonment because A.R.S. § 8-821 provided them with lawful 18 authority to remove the boys.”
John Loudermilk v. Michael Danner (2011)
ca9
“Under this court’s clearly established law, a reasonable police officer would not have known that it was coercive to explain that taking temporary custody of the Louder-milks’ children under Arizona law was a “viable option,” given that (1) the MCSO Officers had reason to…”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 8-821(A) — 9 cases
B.K. v. Thomas Betlach (2019)
ca9
“” ARS § 8-821(A), (D). DCS may also petition to commence dependency proceedings in Arizona state court by alleging that a child is dependent.”
Tinsley v. McKay (2015)
azd
“10 See *1034 A.R.S. § 8-821. While the six-month status reviews only take place if a child has been determined dependent by the juvenile court.”
Arizona Department of Economic Security v. Bernini (2002)
arizctapp
“§ 8-824 and review of taking a child into temporary custody pursuant to A.R.S. § 8-821. Because the respondent judge applied ICWA, she required ADES to establish by clear and convincing evidence 1 rather than a preponderance that the continued removal of Noah J.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 8-821(A)(1) — 3 cases
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 8-821(A)(2) — 1 case
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 8-821(B) — 6 cases
Tinsley v. McKay (2015)
azd
“10 See *1034 A.R.S. § 8-821. While the six-month status reviews only take place if a child has been determined dependent by the juvenile court.”
Chatman v. Ferrell (2020)
azd
“) Nevertheless, Defendants argued that they are 17 not liable for false imprisonment because A.R.S. § 8-821 provided them with lawful 18 authority to remove the boys.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 8-821(B)(1) — 2 cases
Allen v. Chon-Lopez (2007)
arizctapp
“was "a victim or [would] imminently become a victim of abuse or neglect," or "suffering serious physical or emotional injury that can only be diagnosed by a medical doctor or psychologist.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 8-821(B)(l) — 1 case
Marina P. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security (2007)
arizctapp
“” A.R.S. § 8-821(B)(l). That Mother is attempting to evade detection and deportation does not, in and of itself, create probable cause to believe her children are in imminent danger of abuse or neglect.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 8-821(E) — 2 cases
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 8-821(F) — 2 cases
Tinsley v. McKay (2015)
azd
“10 See *1034 A.R.S. § 8-821. While the six-month status reviews only take place if a child has been determined dependent by the juvenile court.”
Chatman v. Ferrell (2020)
azd
“) Nevertheless, Defendants argued that they are 17 not liable for false imprisonment because A.R.S. § 8-821 provided them with lawful 18 authority to remove the boys.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 8-821(H) — 1 case
Chatman v. Ferrell (2020)
azd
“) Nevertheless, Defendants argued that they are 17 not liable for false imprisonment because A.R.S. § 8-821 provided them with lawful 18 authority to remove the boys.”
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.