Opinion
No. 1 CA-CR 13-0482 PRPC
02-12-2015
STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent, v. JULIO JESUS HIGUERA, Petitioner.
COUNSEL Maricopa County Attorney's Office, Phoenix By Diane Meloche Counsel for Respondent Julio Jesus Higuera, Tucson Petitioner
NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION. UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.
Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County
No. CR2010-148715-001
The Honorable Sherry K. Stephens, Judge
REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED
COUNSEL
Maricopa County Attorney's Office, Phoenix
By Diane Meloche
Counsel for Respondent
Julio Jesus Higuera, Tucson
Petitioner
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Judge Maurice Portley delivered the decision of the Court, in which Presiding Judge Andrew W. Gould and Judge Jon W. Thompson joined.
PORTLEY, Judge:
¶1 Petitioner Julio Jesus Higuera petitions this court for review from the dismissal of his notice of post-conviction relief. We have considered the petition for review and, for the reasons stated, grant review and deny relief.
¶2 Higuera pled guilty to theft of means of transportation and the trial court sentenced him to 7.5 years' imprisonment. Higuera seeks review of the summary dismissal of his second notice of post-conviction relief. We have jurisdiction pursuant to Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.9(c).
¶3 We deny relief. While the petition for review presents a number of issues, Higuera did not raise those issues in the notice of petition for post-conviction relief he filed below. The issues Higuera presents for review are a mix of new issues and issues he raised in his petition for post-conviction relief of-right in 2012. A petition for review may not present issues not first presented to the trial court. State v. Ramirez, 126 Ariz. 464, 467, 616 P.2d 924, 927 (App. 1980); State v. Wagstaff, 161 Ariz. 66, 71, 775 P.2d 1130, 1135 (App. 1988); State v. Bortz, 169 Ariz. 575, 577, 821 P.2d 236, 238 (App. 1991); Ariz. R. Crim. P. 32.9(c)(1)(ii). Further, any claim a defendant raised or could have raised in an earlier post-conviction relief proceeding is precluded. Ariz. R. Crim. P. 32.2(a). None of the exceptions under Rule 32.2(b) apply.
¶4 We grant review and deny relief.