SB1500 creates a new Arizona cause of action for people who were wrongly convicted of a felony and later incarcerated, allowing them to seek compensation from the state in superior court. To qualify, a claimant must prove innocence by a preponderance of the evidence and show that the conviction was later pardoned on innocence, reversed or vacated with dismissal or acquittal on retrial, or overturned with a later Alford or no-contest plea while maintaining innocence. The bill sets filing deadlines, requires notice to the attorney general, provides for evidentiary hearings when the state objects, and allows courts to make findings about harmful error or misconduct by city or county employees that may trigger local reimbursement to the state fund.
The bill establishes a detailed compensation structure. Base compensation is tied to 200% of Arizona’s median household income for each year of wrongful incarceration, with additional payments available for death-row incarceration or sex-offender registration, reintegration and health-care costs, unreimbursed fines and restitution, and attorney fees. It also authorizes up to $500,000 in additional damages in some cases, provides non-monetary services such as mental health treatment, education, and financial literacy support, and makes awards non-taxable for state income tax purposes. Payments come from a newly created Erroneous Convictions Fund administered by the Department of Administration, which is continuously appropriated.
SB1500 also requires broad post-judgment relief. When a claim is granted, the court must order expungement and sealing of the related arrest, charge, conviction, sentence, and associated records, restore civil rights including firearm rights unless otherwise ineligible, and direct destruction of certain DNA and fingerprint samples. Law enforcement, corrections, and prosecuting agencies must update their records to reflect the erroneous conviction, and the claimant may state that the offense never occurred for them. The bill also provides notice and mental health reimbursement for victims who requested postconviction notice, reflecting an effort to address both the wrongfully convicted person and the victim of the underlying crime.
The bill’s impact on state law is significant because it creates a new statutory remedy where Arizona previously relied on more limited tort or postconviction avenues. It adds a new article to Title 13, creates a dedicated fund in Title 41, and sets procedures for compensation, reimbursement, expungement, and record sealing. The law is temporary: the new article and fund are effective December 31, 2025, and are repealed June 30, 2027, making this a pilot program rather than a permanent system.
The general sentiment around the bill appears mostly supportive, but not unanimous. It passed key committees and the House by wide margins, though the Senate third reading votes were closer, suggesting some hesitation about the scope or cost of the remedy. The main points of contention are likely the fiscal exposure to the state, the size of possible awards, the burden of proving eligibility, and the mechanism that can shift reimbursement costs to cities or counties if harmful error or misconduct by local employees is found. At the same time, the legislative findings show strong support for compensating innocent people and recognizing the trauma to victims when the wrong person is convicted.
SB1500 amends Arizona law by creating a new statutory compensation scheme for erroneous convictions, adding a new article to Title 13 and establishing the Erroneous Convictions Fund in Title 41. It changes criminal procedure and postconviction relief by authorizing superior court claims, setting evidentiary standards and deadlines, requiring expungement and sealing of records, restoring civil rights, and directing payment and reimbursement procedures through the Department of Administration. It affects wrongfully convicted claimants, the attorney general, courts, the Department of Public Safety, the Department of Corrections, prosecuting agencies, and potentially cities and counties that may be required to reimburse the fund.
The bill appears to have broad bipartisan support for its core purpose of compensating people who were wrongfully convicted, as reflected in strong committee approvals and a large House floor vote. However, the Senate floor votes were narrower, indicating some reservations. Overall, the discussion and legislative findings frame the measure as a corrective justice and reintegration bill, while also acknowledging victims’ needs, which suggests generally favorable sentiment tempered by concern over implementation and cost.
The main contention centers on the scope and cost of the compensation program, including the base award formula, the possibility of up to $500,000 in additional damages, and the creation of a continuously appropriated fund. Another likely point of debate is the evidentiary and procedural structure: claimants must prove innocence, the attorney general can object and trigger hearings, and local governments may be required to reimburse the state if harmful error or misconduct by their employees is found. Some concern may also arise from the bill’s broad expungement and civil-rights restoration provisions, as well as the temporary pilot-program structure and delayed repeal, which suggest lawmakers were balancing reform with caution.