State v. Solis-Apodaca

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UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL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.

IN THE
ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS
DIVISION ONE

STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent,

v.

JOSE JAVIER SOLIS-APODACA, Petitioner.

No. 1 CA-CR 25-0205 PRPC
FILED 09-11-2026

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County
No. CR2011-005191-001
The Honorable Monica Edelstein, Judge

REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

COUNSEL

Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, Phoenix
By Heather Coe-Smith
Counsel for Respondent

Law Office of Thomas J. Marlowe, Scottsdale
By Thomas J. Marlowe
Co-Counsel for Petitioner

Mitchell Stein Carey Chapman, PC, Phoenix
By Karen S. Smith
Co-Counsel for Petitioner

STATE v. SOLIS-APODACA
Decision of the Court

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Presiding Judge Jennifer M. Perkins, Judge Brian Y. Furuya, and Judge D.
Andrew Gaona delivered the following decision.

PER CURIAM:

¶1 Petitioner Jose Javier Solis-Apodaca, seeks review of the
superior court’s order denying his petition for post-conviction relief, filed
pursuant to Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.1. This is Solis-
Apodaca’s fourth petition.

¶2 We will not disturb a superior court’s ruling on a petition for
post-conviction relief absent an abuse of discretion or legal error. See State
v. Gutierrez, 229 Ariz. 573, 577, ¶ 19 (2012). Solis-Apodaca has the burden to
show that the superior court erred in denying his petition for post-
conviction relief. See State v. Poblete, 227 Ariz. 537, 538, ¶ 1 (App. 2011). The
superior court wrongly suggested that an equal protection claim cannot be
litigated in the context of a Rule 32 proceeding. See, e.g., State v. Jensen, 193
Ariz. 105 (App. 1998). But the court correctly concluded that Solis-
Apodaca’s notice was untimely and that his claims are precluded because
he could have raised them in a prior proceeding.

¶3 We have reviewed the record in this matter, the superior
court’s order dismissing the notice for post-conviction relief, petition for
review, State’s response, and reply. Solis-Apodaca has not established
error.

¶4 We grant review but deny relief.

MATTHEW J. MARTIN • Clerk of the Court
FILED: JR

2