What Is
Rule 32 Post-Conviction Relief?
Rule 32 generally applies to defendants convicted
after
a
trial.
It allows eligible individuals to seek relief based upon issues such as:
• Constitutional violations
• Ineffective assistance of counsel
• Newly discovered evidence
• Prosecutorial misconduct
• Significant changes in the law
• Actual innocence claims
• Illegal sentences
• Lack of jurisdiction
Unlike a direct appeal, Rule 32 proceedings frequently focus on matters that were not fully addressed during the original trial or appeal process.
What Is
Rule 33 Post-Conviction Relief?
Rule 33 generally applies to defendants who entered
guilty
or no-contest
pleas.
Many people incorrectly assume that pleading guilty permanently eliminates all future legal remedies.
That is not true.
Even after a plea agreement, individuals may still pursue post-conviction relief when constitutional violations, ineffective assistance of counsel, newly discovered evidence, sentencing errors, or other qualifying circumstances exist.
Because most criminal cases resolve through plea agreements, Rule 33 proceedings are among the most common forms of post-conviction litigation in Arizona.
Common
Grounds
for Rule 32 and Rule 33 Relief
Post-conviction relief is not simply a request for a second opinion.
Specific legal grounds must exist.
Potential claims may include:
Ineffective Assistance of Counsel
Examples may include:
• Failure to investigate critical evidence
• Failure to interview witnesses
• Failure to challenge unlawful searches
• Failure to present available defenses
• Incorrect legal advice regarding plea agreements
• Failure to properly advise regarding immigration consequences
Newly Discovered Evidence
Relief may be available when:
• Important evidence was unavailable during the original proceedings
• New witnesses emerge
• Scientific testing produces new results
• Previously unknown facts significantly affect the outcome
Constitutional Violations
Examples may include:
• Due process violations
• Brady violations
• Improper suppression of evidence
• Violations of the right to counsel
• Coerced confessions
• Juror misconduct
Illegal Sentences
Arizona courts may correct sentences that:
• Exceed statutory limits
• Were imposed incorrectly
• Violate constitutional protections
• Fail to comply with sentencing statutes
Actual Innocence Claims
Some petitions involve substantial evidence indicating the defendant may not have committed the offense.
Although these claims are difficult to prove, Arizona law provides mechanisms for courts to consider credible innocence evidence.
Why Most Rule 32 and Rule 33 Petitions
Fail
Many petitions are denied because:
• Deadlines are missed
• Claims are inadequately supported
• Procedural requirements are ignored
• Issues were previously waived
• Evidence is insufficient
• Petitions rely on conclusions rather than admissible proof
Post-conviction litigation requires substantially more than simply stating that a conviction was unfair.
Appeals
vs. Post-Conviction Relief
Many people confuse
appeals
with
post-conviction proceedings.
They are different.
Appeals
Focus on legal errors appearing in the existing record.
Rule 32 /
Rule 33 Proceedings
Often involve evidence, facts, or constitutional issues outside the original record.
Some cases involve both.
Others may qualify for only one remedy.
__________________________________________________
Courts
In Which We Handle Post-Conviction Cases
Taylor Law Group assists clients seeking post-conviction relief arising from:
• Pima County Superior Court
• Tucson City Court
• Pima County Justice Courts
• Cochise County Courts
• Santa Cruz County Courts
• Pinal County Courts
• Arizona Court of Appeals matters
Related Post-Conviction Relief Services
