Arizona
Arizona Court Records: How to Search Public Access, Maricopa/Pima Carve-Outs, and Sealing
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited August 10, 2026). · 3 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content
Arizona runs a free, statewide court records search, but two of its biggest counties opted out of it. Maricopa and Pima each run their own separate case-lookup systems, so a search on the state's Public Access tool that comes back empty for a Phoenix or Tucson case does not mean the case does not exist, it usually means you searched the wrong system.
Arizona also stands out for something most portals do not admit: it tells you exactly how stale its data can get.
Information last verified on 2026-08-10. This article has not yet been reviewed by a licensed lawyer.
This guide is part of a broader look at court records by state. For the general mechanics of federal versus state versus county searches, see how to look up court records and are court records public.
Public Access: Arizona's Statewide Search, With Two Big Exceptions
Arizona's Public Access to Court Case Information, at apps.azcourts.gov, is free to search and covers information from 177 of 184 courts in Arizona, per the portal's own coverage statement (the portal also offers a Show unavailable courts link listing the gap). Search results are protected by a word-verification step described on the portal as a randomly generated verification words gate intended to prevent excessive, high-volume automated use; a paid annual subscription is offered separately for bulk electronic access.
The honesty point worth noting is how the portal describes its own freshness: case information is updated on the website weekly, with data refreshed each Friday to reflect case information through the Wednesday of that same week. A case filed or updated on a Thursday will not show up until the following week. The portal's own disclaimer is direct about its limits, stating the information on the site is not the official record of the court and should not be used as a substitute for a thorough background search of official public records.
The portal covers case lookup only, not documents. For criminal and civil court documents filed in Superior Court, Arizona directs users to a separate system called eAccess.
Maricopa and Pima: Two Counties, Two Separate Systems
Maricopa County Superior Court runs its own Case Docket tool, covering four searchable case types: civil, criminal, family, and probate. The county's own page notes the system is unavailable Tuesday through Saturday from 3:00 a.m. to 4:00 a.m., and that data modifications can occur within 24 hours of filing due to auditing.
Pima County Clerk of Superior Court runs a comparable system, described on the county's own site as covering criminal, civil, family law, probate and guardianship, and marriage license cases through its Public Record Search and ECR for Parties and Attorneys tools. Pima's page explicitly lists the statewide eAccess system as a separate option alongside its own tools, confirming Pima runs independently of the state portal. Documents from Juvenile Court or Title 36 mental health cases are excluded from this standard access and must be requested through Juvenile Support Services.
The practical takeaway: if you are searching for a Maricopa or Pima County case, skip the statewide Public Access tool and go directly to that county's own system.
What Public Access Excludes
The statewide portal's own language lists its exclusions directly: sealed cases, cases involving Orders of Protection, mental health and probate cases, and victim and witness data. Juvenile incorrigible and delinquency case information also cannot be viewed on the tool, and local ordinance violations are not included at all.
Sealing a Record: Arizona Uses Three Separate Mechanisms
Arizona does not have a single sealing law. It runs three distinct mechanisms, and confusing them is the most common mistake:
Setting aside a conviction, under A.R.S. § 13-905, does not hide the record. The conviction remains visible on a background check, annotated to show it was set aside.
Sealing of arrest, conviction, and sentencing records, under A.R.S. § 13-911, genuinely restricts access and is petition-based. The statute's own wait-period table sets a 10-year wait for a class 2 or 3 felony, 5 years for a class 4, 5, or 6 felony, 3 years for a class 1 misdemeanor, and 2 years for a class 2 or 3 misdemeanor, measured from completion of the non-monetary terms of the sentence and discharge by the court. All fines, fees and restitution ordered by the court must be paid before the petition is filed, which is a separate eligibility condition rather than something that extends the waiting period. Fees are set at the discretion of the Department of Public Safety, with a waiver available for an indigent petitioner or where the underlying case was dismissed or resulted in acquittal.
Expungement under A.R.S. § 36-2862, created by Proposition 207 in 2020, is the state's only true expungement mechanism, and it is limited to marijuana-related conduct that is no longer illegal under Arizona law.
Arizona is not one of the states running a broad, automatic Clean Slate-style sealing program; all three of these remedies are petition-based. For the eligibility rules and process for each, see Arizona expungement laws, which this guide does not duplicate.
Using Arizona Court Records the Right Way
Public Access and the county systems are built for checking a specific case, whether it is your own or one you have a legitimate reason to look into, not for compiling a background file on someone else. If an Arizona court record is used to screen a job applicant or a tenant, that use is governed separately by the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act. Under 15 U.S.C. § 1681c, a criminal conviction is exempt from the standard seven-year reporting window that applies to most arrests and civil judgments, meaning it can be reported indefinitely unless it has been sealed or expunged under Arizona law.
Related Resources
Court Records by State covers the full 50-state picture. See also How to Look Up Court Records, Are Court Records Public?, Arizona Expungement Laws, Arizona Background Check Laws, Arizona Warrant Search, and Arizona Public Records Laws.
Disclaimer
This article provides general information about Arizona's Public Access system, the Maricopa and Pima county alternatives, and Arizona's three record-relief mechanisms. It is not legal advice. Portal coverage, update schedules, and statutes change; verify current details with the Arizona Judicial Branch or a licensed Arizona attorney before relying on anything here for a specific situation.
Last updated: 2026-08-10. Portal facts and fees reflect their published status as of August 2026.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does Arizona have one statewide court records search?
Mostly. Public Access to Court Case Information covers 177 of 184 courts, but Maricopa County and Pima County each run their own separate systems and are not part of the statewide tool.
How current is Arizona's statewide court records data?
It updates weekly. The portal refreshes every Friday to reflect case activity only through the Wednesday of that same week, so it is not a real-time system.
What case types are excluded from Arizona's Public Access tool?
Sealed cases, Orders of Protection cases, mental health and probate cases, victim and witness data, juvenile incorrigible and delinquency case information, and local ordinance violations.
How do I find a Maricopa or Pima County court record?
Use that county's own system rather than the statewide tool. Maricopa County Superior Court runs its own Case Docket, and Pima County Clerk of Superior Court runs its own Public Record Search and ECR tools.
What is the difference between setting aside, sealing, and expunging a record in Arizona?
Setting aside a conviction under A.R.S. 13-905 does not hide the record. Sealing under A.R.S. 13-911 genuinely restricts access after a wait of 2 to 10 years depending on offense level. Expungement under A.R.S. 36-2862 applies only to marijuana-related conduct under Proposition 207.
Can I use Arizona court records to screen a job applicant or tenant?
Not on its own. These are personal case-lookup tools, not FCRA-compliant screening products. Employment and tenant screening are separately governed by the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act.
Updates
Corrected the Arizona sealing waiting period: the 2 to 10 year clock under A.R.S. 13-911 runs from completion of the non-monetary terms of the sentence and discharge by the court, with fines, fees and restitution a separate condition that must be satisfied before the petition is filed.
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on the statutory provisions below, held in our own legal record and retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
Arizona Revised Statutes, Title 12 (Courts and Civil Proceedings), Chapter 2 (JUDICIAL OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES), Article 8 (Clerk of Superior Court)
§ 12-283Powers and dutiesIn force
A. The clerk, in addition to the other duties prescribed by law or rule of court, shall: 1. Attend each session of the court held in the county. 2. Keep a list of fees charged in actions. 3. Keep records required by law or rule of court. 4. On or before January 15 of each year, compile a report on the number of civil actions that are filed in the superior court pursuant to section 12-514 and the age of the plaintiff in each case. The clerk shall submit the report to the governor and the legislature and provide a copy of this report to the secretary of state. B. The clerk may provide a consumer reporting agency as defined in section 44-1691 with a copy of: 1. A court order obligating a person to pay child support or spousal maintenance. 2. An order for assignment under section 25-323 or 25-504. C. A clerk who provides the information in subsection B of this section to a consumer reporting agency shall also provide the information to the child support enforcement administration in the department of economic security. D.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-04 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at azleg.gov
Arizona Revised Statutes, Title 13 (Criminal Code), Chapter 9 (PROBATION AND RESTORATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS)
§ 13-905Setting aside judgment of convicted person on discharge; application; release from disabilities; certificate of second chance; firearm possession; exceptionsIn forcecited in 3 of our articles
A. Except as provided in subsection P of this section, every person convicted of a criminal offense, on fulfillment of the conditions of probation or sentence and discharge by the court, may apply to the court to have the judgment of guilt set aside. The convicted person shall be informed of this right at the time of sentencing. The court may issue an order that includes a certificate of second chance to a person whose judgment of guilt is set aside pursuant to subsection K or N of this section. B. The person or the person's attorney or probation officer may apply to set aside the judgment. The clerk of the court may not charge a filing fee for an application to have a judgment of guilt set aside. C. The court shall consider the following factors when determining whether to set aside the conviction: 1. The nature and circumstances of the offense that the conviction is based on. 2. The applicant's compliance with the conditions of probation, the sentence imposed and any state department of corrections' rules or regulations, if applicable. 3. Any prior or subsequent convictions. 4. The victim's input and the status of victim restitution, if any. 5.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-04 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at azleg.gov
Cited in 20 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Buonafede (Arizona Supreme Court 1991, 168 Ariz. 444)“…ered a minute order, in part, as follows: Based upon A.R.S. § 13-905, Rule 609, Arizona Rules of Evidence,…”
- State v. Furlong (Court of Appeals of Arizona 2020, 249 Ariz. 578)“…court ruled that former A.R.S. § 13-907(E) (2018) (current A.R.S. § 13-905(K) (2019))1 precluded it from consideri…”
- Brown v. Dembow (Court of Appeals of Arizona 2020)“…cluded that a felony conviction set aside under what is now A.R.S. § 13-905 could qualify for impeachment under Rul…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Arizona Background Check Laws (2026 Guide), Arizona Expungement Laws: Set Aside, Record Sealing, and Marijuana Expungement
§ 13-911Sealing of arrest, conviction and sentencing records; requirements; fee; appeal; definitionIn forcecited in 6 of our articles
A. A person may file a petition to seal all case records related to a criminal offense if the person was: 1. Convicted of a criminal offense and has completed all of the terms and conditions of the sentence that was imposed by the court, including the payment of all monetary obligations and restitution to all victims. 2. Charged with a criminal offense and the charge was subsequently dismissed or resulted in a not guilty verdict at a trial. 3. Arrested for a criminal offense and no charges were filed. B. All case records that are sealed pursuant to this section may be: 1. Alleged as an element of an offense. 2. Used as a historical prior felony conviction. 3. Admissible for impeaching any party or witness in a subsequent trial. 4. Used to enhance the sentence for a subsequent felony. 5. Used to enhance the sentence pursuant to sections 28-1381 and 28-1382. 6. Pleaded and proved in any subsequent prosecution of the person by this state or a political subdivision of this state. 7. Used as a conviction if the conviction would be admissible if the conviction was not sealed. C. The person shall file a petition to seal all case records in one of the following: 1.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-01 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at azleg.gov
Cited in 15 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Case law on A.R.S. 13-911 is thin, because the pre-1978 section with that number was Arizona's concealed-weapons statute. Wake v. State (2026) applied the current sealing statute, holding that subsection (E) requires every nonmonetary probation condition, including community service hours, to be complete before petitioning to seal.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- City of Phoenix v. Jones (Court of Appeals of Arizona 1975, 25 Ariz. App. 98)“…iding Judge. Must a defendant charged with a violation of A.R.S. § 13-911, "carrying a concealed weapon" be affor…”
- State Ex Rel. Williams v. City Court of Tucson (Court of Appeals of Arizona 1974, 21 Ariz. App. 318)“…cealed weapon, to-wit a switch blade knife, in violation of A.R.S. § 13-911. When the prosecution established that…”
- Wake v. State (Court of Appeals of Arizona 2026)✓Wake was discharged from probation after doing 10 of 360 ordered community service hours, then petitioned to seal his record. The court held A.R.S. 13-911(E) requires all nonmonetary probation conditions to be complete first, so dismissing his petition was no abuse of discretion.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: How Long Does a Felony Stay on Your Record? (2026), Arizona DUI Laws: Penalties, BAC Limit & License (2026), DUI Expungement by State: Where You Can Clear Your Record
Arizona Revised Statutes, Title 36 (Public Health and Safety), Chapter 28.2 (RESPONSIBLE ADULT USE OF MARIJUANA)
§ 36-2862Expungement; petition; appeal; dismissal of complaints; rulesIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
(Caution: 1998 Prop. 105 applies) A. Beginning July 12, 2021, an individual who was arrested for, charged with, adjudicated or convicted by trial or plea of, or sentenced for, any of the following offenses based on or arising out of conduct occurring before the effective date of this section may petition the court to have the record of that arrest, charge, adjudication, conviction or sentence expunged: 1. Possessing, consuming or transporting two and one-half ounces or less of marijuana, of which not more than twelve and one-half grams was in the form of marijuana concentrate. 2. Possessing, transporting, cultivating or processing not more than six marijuana plants at the individual's primary residence for personal use. 3. Possessing, using or transporting paraphernalia relating to the cultivation, manufacture, processing or consumption of marijuana. B. If the court receives a petition for expungement pursuant to this section: 1. The court shall notify the prosecuting agency of the filing of the petition, and allow the prosecuting agency to respond to the petition within thirty days. 2.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-04 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at azleg.gov
Cited in 25 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Santillanes (Court of Appeals of Arizona 2022)“…transporting two and one-half ounces or less of marijuana.” A.R.S. § 36-2862(A). In 2021, Santillanes petitioned the…”
- State v. Simental (Court of Appeals of Arizona 2025, 563 P.3d 169)“…mining whether an offense is eligible for expungement under A.R.S. § 36-2862, (2) the trial court improperly shifted…”
- State v. Bouhdida (Court of Appeals of Arizona 2024, 560 P.3d 368)“…the statutory threshold, are eligible for expungement under A.R.S. § 36-2862. ¶7 We review the denial…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
United States Code Title 15
§ 1681cRequirements relating to information contained in consumer reportsIn forcecited in 61 of our articles
Except as authorized under subsection (b), no consumer reporting agency may make any consumer report containing any of the following items of information: Cases under title 11 or under the Bankruptcy Act that, from the date of entry of the order for relief or the date of adjudication, as the case may be, antedate the report by more than 10 years. Civil suits, civil judgments, and records of arrest that, from date of entry, antedate the report by more than seven years or until the governing statute of limitations has expired, whichever is the longer period. Paid tax liens which, from date of payment, antedate the report by more than seven years. Accounts placed for collection or charged to profit and loss which antedate the report by more than seven years. Any other adverse item of information, other than records of convictions of crimes which antedates the report by more than seven years.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-16 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at uscode.house.gov
Cited in 383 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Katz v. Donna Karan Co. (2017) addressed the FACTA truncation rule in 1681c(g) and affirmed dismissal for lack of Article III standing, treating material risk of harm as a fact question. Edward Seamans v. Temple University (2014) held the seven-year window in 1681c(a)(4) is extended for an education loan only until that loan is repaid.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Katz v. Donna Karan Co. (Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit 2017, 872 F.3d 114)✓A shopper sued two stores whose receipts printed the first six digits of his credit card number; the Second Circuit affirmed dismissal for lack of standing, seeing no clear error in the finding that those digits show only the card issuer, not a material risk of identity theft.
- Edward Seamans v. Temple University (Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 2014, 744 F.3d 853)✓A defaulted university loan kept appearing on a borrower's credit reports after he repaid it because the school never reported the delinquency date; the Third Circuit held the Higher Education Act suspends section 1681c(a)(4)'s aging-off rule only until repayment.
- Gonzales v. Arrow Financial Services, LLC (Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 2011, 660 F.3d 1055)✓A debt buyer offered to settle health club debts over seven years old, saying that if it was reporting the account the bureaus would be told it was settled; the Ninth Circuit, treating those debts as unreportable under section 1681c(a)(4), called that implication misleading.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Background Check Laws by State (2026 Guide), Alabama Background Check Laws (2026 Guide), Arkansas Background Check Laws (2026 Guide)
Sources and References
- Arizona Judicial Branch, Public Access to Court Case Information(apps.azcourts.gov).gov
- Maricopa County Superior Court, Case Docket(superiorcourt.maricopa.gov).gov
- Pima County Clerk of Superior Court, Case Records(cosc.pima.gov).gov
- Cornell Legal Information Institute, 15 U.S.C. § 1681c, Requirements relating to information contained in consumer reports(law.cornell.edu)
- Arizona Revised Statutes 13-911, Sealing of arrest, conviction and sentencing records; requirements; fee; appeal; definition(azleg.gov)