Arkansas Code Annotated
Ark. Code Ann. § 5-26-501 (2026)
Interference with visitation
✓ current as of May 2026
-
- A person commits the offense of interference with visitation if, knowing that he or she has no lawful right to do so, he or she takes, entices, or keeps any minor from any person entitled by a court decree or order to the right of visitation with the minor.
- A person claiming interference with visitation shall provide a copy of the signed court order or decree regarding custody or visitation rights to a law enforcement officer as proof of the interference with visitation.
-
- Interference with visitation is a Class C misdemeanor.
-
However, interference with visitation is a:
- Class D felony for any offense if the minor is taken, enticed, or kept outside of the State of Arkansas; or
- Class A misdemeanor for a third or subsequent offense.
-
It is an affirmative defense to a prosecution that:
-
A person or lawful guardian committed the act to protect the minor from imminent physical harm if the defendant's:
- Belief that physical harm was imminent is reasonable; and
- Conduct in withholding visitation rights was a reasonable response to the harm believed to be imminent;
- A person or lawful guardian committed the act based on a reasonable belief that the person entitled to visitation would remove the minor from the jurisdiction of the court;
- The act was committed with the mutual consent of all parties having a right to custody and visitation of the minor; or
- The act was otherwise authorized by law.
-
A person or lawful guardian committed the act to protect the minor from imminent physical harm if the defendant's:
History. Acts 1985, No. 540, § 1; A.S.A. 1947, § 41-2415; Acts 1999, No. 1129, § 1; 2007, No. 827, § 33.
Case Notes
Contempt.
Permanent restraining order, which authorized law-enforcement officers to arrest and incarcerate a mother for actions far beyond the statutory offense of interference with visitation, under this section, was an impermissible delegation of the circuit court's judicial power, under Ark. Const., Art. 7, § 26, to enforce its orders by finding the mother in contempt, under§ 16-10-108. Brock v. Eubanks, 102 Ark. App. 165, 288 S.W.3d 272 (2008).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2
cases, 1996–2008 · leading case: Brock v. Eubanks, 288 S.W.3d 272 (Ark. Ct. App. 2008).
Brock v. Eubanks, 288 S.W.3d 272 (Ark. Ct. App. 2008). “The order did not address how or when her incarceration could be ended, and she was deprived of the opportunity to testify and raise affirmative defenses to contempt that are allowed by Ark.Code Ann. § 5-26-501. We therefore reverse the portion of the order that grants…”
Carter v. Carter, 470 S.E.2d 193 (W. Va. 1996). “125 (Michie 1978); Ark.Code Ann. § 5-26-501 (1993); Mont.Code Ann.”
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.