ARS 13-1802(A) Interpretation

The crime of theft, prior to 1978, was codified in A.R.S. 13-621. All forms of theft under A.R.S. 13-621 required proof of the defendant's specific intent. State v. Fleming, 117 Ariz. 122, 128, 571 P.2d 268, 274 (1977). The current statute was adopted in October 1978. It created six separate classifications under which theft may be found, each described in separate subsections of A.R.S. 13-1802(A). In State v. Morse, the court specifically held that intent was a necessary element under both subsections: (1) and (3), but was not necessary under the remaining subsections, including (5), under which Morse was convicted. 127 Ariz. 25, 30-31, 617 P.2d 1141, 1146-47 (1980). Thus, although dicta in Morse, the argument that specific intent is necessary under A.R.S. 13-1802(A)(4) has already been rejected by our supreme court.