From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Hines

ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION TWO
Jun 29, 2018
No. 2 CA-CR 2018-0084-PR (Ariz. Ct. App. Jun. 29, 2018)

Opinion

No. 2 CA-CR 2018-0084-PR

06-29-2018

THE STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent, v. ARVEL CHARLES HINES, Petitioner.

COUNSEL Sheila Polk, Yavapai County Attorney By Patti M. Wortman, Supervising Deputy County Attorney, Camp Verde Counsel for Respondent Arvel Hines, Douglas In Propria Persona


THIS DECISION DOES NOT CREATE LEGAL PRECEDENT AND MAY NOT BE CITED EXCEPT AS AUTHORIZED BY APPLICABLE RULES.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
See Ariz. R. Sup. Ct. 111(c)(1); Ariz. R. Crim. P. 31.19(e). Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Yavapai County
Nos. V1300CR820090385 and V1300CR201680125
The Honorable Michael R. Bluff, Judge

REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

COUNSEL Sheila Polk, Yavapai County Attorney
By Patti M. Wortman, Supervising Deputy County Attorney, Camp Verde
Counsel for Respondent Arvel Hines, Douglas
In Propria Persona

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Presiding Judge Staring authored the decision of the Court, in which Chief Judge Eckerstrom and Judge Brearcliffe concurred. STARING, Presiding Judge:

¶1 Arvel Hines seeks review of the trial court's order summarily denying his petition for post-conviction relief filed pursuant to Rule 32, Ariz. R. Crim. P. We will not disturb that order unless the court abused its discretion. See State v. Roseberry, 237 Ariz. 507, ¶ 7 (2015). Hines has not shown such abuse here.

¶2 In 2009, Hines pled guilty to aggravated driving under the influence, endangerment, and child abuse. The trial court sentenced him to concurrent prison terms for driving under the influence and endangerment, the longer of which was 4.5 years. For child abuse, the court suspended the imposition of sentence and placed Hines on a four-year term of intensive probation.

¶3 In 2016, Hines pled guilty to aggravated driving with a blood alcohol concentration of .15 or greater. As a result, the trial court revoked Hines's probation. The court imposed a 2.5-year prison term for child abuse, to be followed by a seven-year prison term for aggravated driving with a blood alcohol concentration of .15 or greater.

¶4 Hines filed a notice of post-conviction relief, and appointed counsel filed a notice stating he had reviewed the record in both cause numbers but found no claims to raise pursuant to Rule 32. Hines then filed a pro se petition arguing the state had violated the Equal Protection Clause by withdrawing a plea offer and his counsel had been ineffective in failing to "secure" that offer before it was withdrawn. The trial court summarily denied relief, and this petition for review followed.

¶5 On review, Hines repeats his claim that the state violated the Equal Protection Clause by withdrawing its first plea offer. But, even if this claim had merit, Hines waived it by pleading guilty. "By entering a guilty plea, a defendant waives all non-jurisdictional defects and defenses." State v. Leyva, 241 Ariz. 521, ¶ 18 (App. 2017), quoting State v. Banda, 232 Ariz. 582, ¶ 12 (App. 2013). Hines also asserts, for the first time on review, that his aggregate sentence is excessive. We do not address claims not raised below. See State v. Fowler, 156 Ariz. 408, 414 (App. 1987).

Hines does not assert on review that the trial court erred by rejecting his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. --------

¶6 We grant review but deny relief.


Summaries of

State v. Hines

ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION TWO
Jun 29, 2018
No. 2 CA-CR 2018-0084-PR (Ariz. Ct. App. Jun. 29, 2018)
Case details for

State v. Hines

Case Details

Full title:THE STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent, v. ARVEL CHARLES HINES, Petitioner.

Court:ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION TWO

Date published: Jun 29, 2018

Citations

No. 2 CA-CR 2018-0084-PR (Ariz. Ct. App. Jun. 29, 2018)