CATEGORIES

CATEGORIES

SB1015

Effective Date
 General

LAW ENFORCEMENT, EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT COOPERATION
Sen. Waring

Authorizes a law enforcement officer who reasonably believes that a person may have committed a DUI, Extreme DUI or Aggravated DUI to request health care emergency department personnel to provide a copy of any written or electronic report of the person’s Blood Alcohol Concentration.

Requires the officer to obtain permission from the emergency department director or the director’s designee in order to speak with the personnel.  Permission can not be refused, but may be delayed if taking the personnel away from patient care duties could cause patient harm.  Emergency department personnel must comply with the request but are not required to determine probable cause on their own.  Emergency room personnel are not liable for complying with the request unless acting with gross negligence.

Statute(s) Created:  28-1390

Court Impact:  Informational.

Back to Top

 SB1076

Effective Date
General

PEDESTRIAN CONTROL SIGNALS
Sen. Linda Gray

Expands the definition of pedestrian control signals to include symbols indicating a walking person and an upraised hand.

Statute(s) Impacted:  28-646

Court Impact:  Informational.

Back to Top

 SB1161

Effective Date
General

HOV LANES; MOTORCYCLES; BUSES
Sen.  Tibshraeny

Permits motorcycles and public transportation vehicles, regardless of the number of passengers, to use a high occupancy vehicle lane. 

Defines public transportation vehicle.

Statute(s) Impacted:  28-737

Court Impact:  Informational.

Back to Top

 HB2750

Effective Date
General

JUSTICES OF THE PEACE; JURISDICTION
Rep. Pearce

Justice of the Peace Courts in a county with a population of more than two million have original jurisdiction over the following actions that occur within the precinct in which the Justice of the Peace is elected:

• Civil actions up to the statutory limit,

• Small claims,

• Civil traffic offenses unless filed by a municipal officer or agent or an officer employed by a law enforcement agency under contract to the municipality for law enforcement services,

• Special detainers,

• Forcible detainers ten thousand dollars or less,

• Misdemeanors, unless filed by a municipal officer in municipal court or consolidated with a felony,

The Superior Court no longer may exercise concurrent jurisdiction with JP Courts over civil actions from $5,000 to $10,000.

Statute(s) Impacted:   22-101, 22-201, 22-301

Court Impact:  May reduce the number of civil filings in Superior Court and increase the number of civil filings in Justice of the Peace Courts throughout the state.  In Maricopa County, may reduce the number of civil and criminal filings in Superior and Municipal Courts and increase the number of civil and criminal filings in Justice of the Peace Courts.

Back to Top

 SB1131

Effective Date
General

TRAFFIC VIOLATIONS; STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS
Sen. Chuck Gray

Requires a civil traffic violation case to be commenced as follows:

• Within 60 days of an alleged violation if commenced by issuance of a citation,

• Within 60 days of an alleged violation if commenced by filing of a citation and must be served within 90 days from the filing date,

• Within one year of the alleged violation if the alleged violation is under investigation in conjunction with an accident resulting in death (180 days if the accident under investigation does not involve death).

Statute(s) Impacted:  28-1592

Court Impact:  Potential impact to photo enforcement programs due to time limitation for service.

Back to Top

 HB2001

Effective Date
Delayed
01/01/2009

DEFENSIVE DRIVING SCHOOLS
Rep. Jim Weiers

Upon the expiration of all contracts that are in existence on July 1, 2007 between the court and a defensive driving school provider, an eligible individual who elects to attend a defensive driving school is permitted to attend any Supreme Court certified defensive driving school that complies with the court automation and reporting requirements The renewal of any contract between a court and a defensive driving school after July 1, 2007 will be considered a new contract.  Authorizes a court to adopt requirements for a school to electronically report school completions and transfer funds, subject to the approval of the Defensive Driving Board.

Statute(s) Impacted:  28-3393

Court Impact:  Effective January 1, 2009, courts must allow eligible traffic violators to attend any supreme court certified Defensive Driving School. A court may require that a school electronically report school completions and electronically transfer funds, subject to the approval of the Defensive Driving Board.   Any contract renewed by a court after July 1, 2007, is considered a new contract.

Back to Top

HB2226

Effective Date
General

TRAFFIC TICKETS; COLLECTIONS; CIVIL PENALTIES
Rep. McClure

Prohibits the court from initiating collection procedures on an unpaid civil penalty and subsequently notifying the Motor Vehicle Division to suspend a person's driving privileges or refuse to renew a vehicle registration for an unpaid civil traffic violation if all of the following apply:

• The unpaid civil penalty is for a civil traffic violation for which the final disposition occurs more than 36 months before the court initiates collection proceedings,

• The court does not have a paper or electronic record dated within 36 months after the traffic violation occurs indicating that the responsible person was notified that the civil penalty is unpaid and due,

• The court has not notified MVD to suspend the responsible person's driver license or permit,

• The court has not notified the responsible person or the MVD about the court's request that MVD refuse to renew the responsible person's vehicle registration,

• The court does not have a record of extending the time for payment of the civil penalty or providing for installment payments.

The court must also notify MVD to remove a violation from the person’s driving record if the court is prohibited from collecting fine monies or suspending the person’s license for the reasons listed above.  Note, however, if MVD was notified within 36 months, this statute would not be applicable.  Requires the court to cease collection activities and notify MVD if an individual presents reasonable evidence that a civil penalty and other fees, fines or surcharges has been paid.  MVD actions based upon the case in question must be rescinded.

Statute(s) Impacted:  28-1601

Court Impact:  As long as at least one of the following actions has occurred, a court may initiate collection proceedings on an unpaid civil penalty:

1. The unpaid civil penalty is less than 36 months old,

2. The court has a paper or electronic record dated within 36 months of the violation indicating that the responsible person was notified that the civil penalty is due,

3. The court notified ADOT to suspend the responsible person's driver license,

4. The court notified either the responsible person or ADOT about the court's request that the person's vehicle registration not be renewed, or

5. The court has a record of extending the time for payment of the civil penalty or providing for installment payments.

Back to Top

 HB2033

Effective Date
Delayed
07/01/2008

TEENAGE DRIVER SAFETY ACT
Rep. McComish

Expands the restrictions of the Class G driver license to prohibit a licensee from driving between midnight and 5 A.M. during the first six months of licensure unless accompanied by a parent or legal guardian or driving to or from listed locations or events.  Restricts the licensee from driving with more than one passenger under the age of 18 unless the passengers are the driver’s siblings or the driver is accompanied by a parent or legal guardian.  Assesses the following:

• For a first violation, a maximum $75 civil penalty and extension of the restrictions for 30 days

• For a second violation, a maximum $100 civil penalty and an extension of the restrictions for 60 days

• For a third or subsequent violation, a maximum civil penalty of $100 and suspension of the individual’s driver license for 30 days.

Requires the court to dismiss a citation for violation of any restriction if a notarized letter from a parent or legal guardian is submitted as proof that a licensee was en route to or from a permitted event or that the minors in the vehicle were the siblings of the licensee or from an employer, school or religious official stating the licensee was returning from a permitted event in order for a citation to be dismissed. 

Applies to permits and licenses issued after June 30, 2008.

Statute(s) Impacted:  28-3153, 28-3154, 28-3156, 28-3174, 28-3321

Court Impact:  Courts that handle driver’s license violations involving teenagers should review this bill for detailed requirements and impact.

Back to Top

 HB2758

Effective Date
(See Summary)

JUSTICES OF THE PEACE; FUNDING
Rep. Adams

Beginning in FY 2007-08, reduces indigent care liability of a county with a population of more than 1.5 million or more by an amount equal to the amount of state reimbursement the county would have received for Justice of the Peace salaries.  The county is in turn responsible for 100% of the salary and employee related expenses of a Justice of the Peace.

Statute(s) Impacted:  11-292, 11-300, 12-262, 22-117, 22-201, 36-2928

Court Impact:  Limits the requirement for state contribution to JP salaries to those counties with a population of less than 1.5 million persons only.  Counties with a population of 1.5 million or more will pay the entire cost of JP salaries.  (Retroactive to July 1, 2007.)  Claries the geographic jurisdiction of a justice court in a county with a population of more than 2 million persons to be for actions that occur in the "precinct in which the justice of the peace is elected' instead of where the court is located.  (General Effective Date.)

Back to Top

HB2787

Effective Date
General

BUDGET RECONCILIATION; CRIMINAL JUSTICE
Rep. McComish, Sen. Burns

In pertinent part, requires a county to pay 61.5% of the compensation of a justice of the peace, including ERE, except that the county must pay the full amount of the employee’s contribution to ASRS or any county health plan. 

Effective January 1, 2008, law enforcement is required to secure a sample for DNA testing from any person arrested for certain enumerated offenses.  If a judicial officer releases a person charged with any of the offenses on the person’s own recognizance or on bail, the judicial officer must order the person to report within five days to law enforcement to provide a sample for DNA testing purposes.

Requires the court to revoke the person’s release if a sample is not provided within five days. 

Permits a person who provides a sample under this law to petition the court to order the person’s DNA profile and sample to be expunged from the Arizona DNA Identification System provided criminal charges are not filed within the appropriate period of time or are dismissed, or if the person is acquitted at trial.  There is an exception preventing the person from being eligible to petition the court if arrested or charged with another offense that would require DNA testing or if convicted of another offense that requires DNA testing.  Removes the provision permitting a person convicted of a felony designated as a misdemeanor to petition the court for the removal of the DNA profile.

Increases the surcharge collected for deposit into the Arizona DNA Identification System Fund from 3% to 7% until December 31, 2011, at which point the surcharge is decreased to 6%.

Statute(s) Impacted:  12-116.01, 13-610, 13-2314.01, 13-3967, 38-886.01, 41-191.09

Court Impact:  Bail/bond amounts, bond cards, surcharge schedules, and local court enhancement fees will need to be modified to reflect the surcharge change.  A judicial officer who releases a person charged with certain enumerated offenses on bail or on the person's own recognizance must order the person to report for DNA testing within 5 days.  Courts must revoke the release of a person who does not comply.  Courts may begin to see petitions for the expungement of DNA results filed.

Back to Top

 HB2753

Effective Date
General

VEHICLE IMPOUNDMENT AND IMMOBILIZATION
Rep. Pearce

In pertinent part, requires an impounding agency to allow access to the owner of a vehicle for the purpose of inspecting it for damage or to a representative of an ignition interlock device company seeking to remove the device.  An agency is prohibited from charging a fee for the access.  Failure to allow access is a Class 2 misdemeanor.  An owner who does not inspect the vehicle prior to the removal of the device creates a rebuttable presumption that any damage to the vehicle did not occur while in possession of the impounding agency.  Does not create a cause of action against an impounding agency for allowing access to a representative of an ignition interlock device company.  An individual who violates an agreement to prevent an unlicensed driver from operating a vehicle or a lending entity who releases a vehicle to an owner in violation of statute is subject to a minimum civil penalty of $250.

Statute(s) Impacted:  28-3511, 28-3512, 28-3513, 28-3514, 28-3815, 41-1752

Statute(s) Created:  28-4848

Court Impact:  Justice courts will need to be familiar with the changes to existing statutes, regarding the impoundment and immobilization of motor vehicles operated by persons who do not have a valid driving privilege, in order to properly conduct an immobilization or poststorage hearing to determine the validity of the immobilization or storage.

Generalizes the existing, specific driver’s license suspensions and revocations that will result in vehicle impoundment or immobilization to now simply include any driver’s license suspension or revocation, for whatever reason; the driver cannot produce evidence of ever having a valid license or permit issued by another jurisdiction; failure to have a required ignition interlock device.  Eliminates the exemption from vehicle impoundment for a minor driving a parent’s or guardian’s vehicle when the minor has consumed alcohol.  Requires proof of a rental agreement, effective on the date of impoundment, if the owner is in the business of renting vehicles and is requesting release prior to the end of the 30-day impoundment period.  Clarifies that the spouse or any other vehicle owner requesting vehicle release prior to the end of the 30-day impoundment period had to be listed on the Department of Transportation’s (DOT) records as an owner at the time of impoundment.  Provides that if a spouse or vehicle owner requests release of the vehicle before the end of the 30-day impoundment period and enters into an agreement with the impounding agency prohibiting operation of the released vehicle by an unlicensed driver, the spouse or other owner will be ineligible for early release of the vehicle if it is subsequently impounded within one year.  Adds "a valid salvage or dismantle certificate" to the proof of ownership documents necessary for release of a vehicle.  Requires proof of motor vehicle liability insurance as a condition of releasing the vehicle.  Clarifies that an owner in the business of renting vehicles, a motor vehicle dealer, or a financial institution that requests the release of a vehicle must pay administrative charges to the impounding agency.  Specifies that the person requesting release of the vehicle on behalf of a rental company or financial institution cannot be the person who was operating the vehicle at the time of impoundment. 

States that a person to whom a vehicle has been released, other than an owner, identified in the DOT's records as having an interest in the vehicle,  (e.g. a rental car company, motor vehicle dealer or financial institution) cannot return the impounded vehicle to the person who was operating the vehicle at the time of impoundment unless the vehicle owner or owner’s agent presents a valid driver’s license, current vehicle registration or salvage or dismantle title and evidence of a motor vehicle liability policy.  Violation constitutes a civil traffic violation, subject to a civil penalty of $250.

Establishes a new civil traffic violation, subject to a civil penalty of $250, for a person who enters into an agreement with the impounding agency for early release of the vehicle who then allows a person to operate the vehicle in violation of the agreement.

Alters the time from five working days to five business days within which a justice court must conduct a post storage hearing after receiving a hearing request.  Limits the time to within ten days after the date on the notice of impoundment that a vehicle owner, spouse or other person may request a post storage hearing.  Specifies that a person is entitled to only one post storage hearing with either the impounding agency or a justice court, but not both.

Establishes a new class 2 misdemeanor for a towing company, storage yard, facility or person that has physical possession of a vehicle who refuses access or charges a fee during normal business hours to an ignition interlock device manufacturer or installer or a person who is listed as a lien holder on the DOT’s records for the purpose of removing an interlock device from the vehicle or assessing the vehicle’s condition.

Back to Top