ARIZONA POST CONVICTION RELIEF (PCR) ATTORNEY

Lisa writes petitions for post-conviction relief in all Arizona superior courts.  She also writes petitions for review in the Arizona Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court of Arizona for petitions denied in the superior courts.

 

A petitioner (defendant) who pled guilty or admitted a probation violation in Superior Court usually takes the following appellate route:

 

• Petition for Post-Conviction Relief to Superior Court before the sentencing judge;

• Petition for Review to Arizona Court of Appeals after denial of Petition for Post-Conviction Relief in Superior Court;

• Petition for Review to Arizona Supreme Court after denial of Petition for Review in Arizona Court of Appeals;​​​

​​​

​

​

​

​

​

• Federal Habeas Corpus Petition for Review filed in U.S. Federal District Court for the District of Arizona after denial of Petition for review in Arizona Supreme Court.

​​

TIMELY GUILTY PLEA, PROBATION VIOLATION ADMISSION, OR AUTOMATIC PROBATION VIOLATION PCRS

Most defendants plead guilty.  Rule 33 of the Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure applies to petitions for post-conviction relief (PCR) where a defendant has pled guilty.  admitted a probation violation, or had an automatic probation violation.  The PCR is the defendant’s appeal in these cases.  Rule 33.1 lists the following grounds for relief that may be argued in a timely, first PCR:

 

•  The plea or admission to a probation violation was obtained, or the sentence was imposed, in violation of the U.S. Constitution or the Arizona Constitution;

 

•   The court did not have subject matter jurisdiction to render a judgment or to impose a sentence on the defendant;

 

•  The sentence as imposed is not authorized by law or by the plea agreement;

 

•  The defendant continues to be or will continue to be in custody after his or her sentence expired;

 

•  Newly discovered material facts probably exist, and those facts probably would have changed the judgment or sentence;

 

•  The failure to timely file a notice of post-conviction relief was not the defendant’s fault;

 

•  There has been a significant change in the law that, if applicable to the defendant’s case, would probably overturn the defendant’s judgment or sentence; or

 

• The defendant demonstrates by clear and convincing evidence that the facts underlying the claim would be sufficient to establish that no reasonable fact-finder would find the defendant guilty of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt.    

​

​

​

​

 

 

TIMELY FOUND GUILTY OR CONTESTED PROBATION VIOLATION PCRS

 

Rule 32 of the Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure applies to petitions for post-conviction relief (PCR) for defendants who were found guilty at trial or a contested probation violation hearing.  Rule 32.1 lists the following grounds for relief that may be argued in a timely, first PCR:

 

• Constitutional errors that violated either the U.S. Constitution or the Arizona Constitution;

 

• Judgment or sentence was imposed by a court with no jurisdiction to do so;

 

• Sentence imposed exceeded the maximum authorized by law or was otherwise not in accordance with sentence authorized by law;

 

• Petitioner being held in custody after sentence imposed has expired;

 

•  Newly discovered material facts probably exist and such facts probably would have changed the verdict or sentence;

 

•  The failure to timely file a notice of appeal was not the defendant’s fault;

 

• A significant change in the law that if determined to apply to petitioner’s case would probably overturn the petitioner’s conviction or sentence; or

 

• Defendant demonstrates by clear and convincing evidence that the facts underlying the claim would be sufficient to establish that no reasonable fact-finder would find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, or that the death penalty would not have been imposed.

 

Rule 32.4 of the Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure states that the filing of a Notice Requesting Post-Conviction Relief in the court where the petitioner was convicted starts the PCR process.  The Notice Requesting Post-Conviction Relief must be filed within 90 days after the oral pronouncement of sentence or within 30 days after the issuance of the mandate in the direct appeal, whichever is later.

 

Preparing and filing a timely petition for post-conviction relief is full of traps for the inexperienced attorney.  Lisa is an experienced, passionate and detail-oriented PCR attorney.   Please call LisaLaw, LLC or fill out the online form for a free case review.

 

ARIZONA TIMELY PCR SUCCESS STORIES

 

• Lisa was hired to write a Reply to a timely, first Petition for Post-Conviction Relief.  It was the last chance for the petitioner to argue ineffective assistance of counsel and newly discovered evidence.  Lisa reviewed a witness’s cell phone records in the case and discovered that three  cell phone calls that were supposedly made only minutes before the victim opened her door and was shot dead were actually made three hours before.  In other words, the victim was not on the phone with the witness claiming that defendant was outside pounding on her door right before she was shot.  Lisa argued that petitioner’s trial attorney provided ineffective assistance of counsel in failing to find this out and that her discovery was newly discovered evidence that mandated that the Maricopa County Superior Court judge overturn petitioner’s conviction for first degree murder.  The judge agreed with Lisa and overturned his conviction for first degree murder. 

 

• Lisa was hired to write a timely, first Petition for Post-Conviction Relief for a client who was sentenced to four years in prison for a first violation of probation during a contentious probation admission disposition hearing.  She found out that the judge had illegally sentenced the defendant at the probation admission disposition hearing.  The State conceded the error.  His case was remanded for resentencing.  The judge resentenced him to time served. 

​​

UNTIMELY PCRS​

Untimely PCRs are possible under Rules 32 and 33.  Rules 32.4(b) (3)(D) and 33.4(b)(3)(D) state that a court must excuse an untimely Notice Requesting Post-Conviction Relief for claims under Rules 32.1(a) and 33.1(a) such as ineffective assistance of counsel and other constitutional violations “if the defendant adequately explains why the failure to timely file a notice was not the defendant’s fault.”  Rules 32.4(b)(3)(B) and 33.4(b)(3)(B) state that a defendant must file a Notice Requesting Post-Conviction Relief for Rules 32.1(b) through (h) claims and Rule 33.1(b) through (h) claims “within a reasonable time after discovering the basis of the claim.”

 

A Superior Court judge uses his or her judicial discretion to decide whether to grant or dismiss an untimely or successive Notice Requesting Post-Conviction Relief.  If the Notice is granted, the defendant has to file a PCR within a specific time period.  If the Notice is denied, the defendant may appeal the denial to the relevant Arizona Court of Appeals by filing a Petition for Review within 30 days of the denial.

 

Asking a judge to reopen a case for an untimely petition for post conviction relief is a complex process.  Lise is an experienced, passionate and detail-oriented PCR attorney.  Please call LisaLaw, LLC or fill out the online form for a free case review.

​

ARIZONA UNTIMELY PCR SUCCESS STORIES

Lisa has had success getting untimely Notices Requesting Post Conviction Relief granted. 

 

• Client was a young gang member who shot from a moving vehicle at the same time as another gang member, killing an innocent man.  He had pled to first degree murder and been sentenced to 25 to life in prison.

 

• Client was an 18-year-old meth addict who helped his mother and some family members rob, assault, and dump a man in the desert to die in the summer.  He also pled to first degree murder and been sentenced to 25 to life in prison.

 

• Client was a young gang member who was found guilty of first degree murder of a rival gang member who was sentenced to 25 to life in prison after a jury trial.  

 

• Client pled guilty to attempted Luring a Minor for Sexual Exploitation and attempted Child Prostitution in 2018.  His first PCR was denied in 2019.  Lisa argued that he had received an illegal sentence when he was sentenced in 2018.   The Court found that he had received an illegal sentence and resentenced him.

​​

APPOINTMENT OF INVESTIGATORS, EXPERT WITNESSES, AND MITIGATION SPECIALISTS

​

Rules 32.5(c) and 33.5(c) provide that the court may appoint an investigator, expert witnesses, and a mitigation specialist, or any combination of them for a poor defendant.  Lisa has had great success getting these types of experts appointed for her poor defendants who are incarcerated.   

 

Preparing and filing an untimely petition for post conviction relief is full of traps for the inexperienced attorney.  Lisa is an experienced, passionate and detail-oriented PCR attorney.   Please call LisaLaw, LLC or fill out the online form for a free case review.