Cited by
Opinions in Arizona that cite State of Arizona v. Steven Ray Lopez, 323 P.3d 1164.
- State of Arizona v. Rogelio Castro Solano 543 P.3d 278 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2024
-
State of Arizona v. Rogelio Castro Solano
543 P.3d 278
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2024
¶6 On review, Solano contends the trial court erred by dismissing his Rule 32.1(f) claim because “he was able to demonstrate that the failure to timely file was not his fault.” He maintains that Rule 32.1(f) “does not have a reasonable time frame requirement.” In support of that assertion
- State v. Rocco Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
-
State v. Rocco
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
13-4234(G) (emphasis added); ¶¶ 7-9 (App. 2014) (untimely notice of post-conviction relief without an exception is time-barred by jurisdictional limitations regardless of the claim’s “constitutional magnitude”).
- State v. Gustie Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
-
State v. Gustie
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
§ 13-4234(G) (providing that the time limits for filing a notice and petition for post- conviction relief “are jurisdictional, and an untimely filed notice or petition shall be dismissed with prejudice”); ¶ 8 (App. 2014).
- State v. Hennix Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
-
State v. Hennix
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
The time limits for filing a notice and petition for post-conviction relief “are jurisdictional, and an untimely filed notice or petition shall be dismissed with prejudice.” ¶ 8 (App. 2014); Ariz. Rev. Stat. (“A.R.S.”) § 13-4234(G).
- State v. Ontjes Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
-
State v. Ontjes
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
P. 32.2(a)-(b); ¶ 8 (App. 2014) (under Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-4234(G) the time limits for filing a notice and petition for post-conviction relief “are jurisdictional, and an untimely filed notice or petition shall be dismissed with prejudice”).
- State v. Worley Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
-
State v. Worley
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Arizona Revised Statutes section 13–4234(G) provides that the time limits for filing a notice and petition for post-conviction relief “are jurisdictional, and an untimely filed notice or petition shall be dismissed with prejudice.” ¶ 8 (App. 2014).
- State v. Hernandez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
-
State v. Hernandez
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
¶¶ 6–8 (App. 2014); see also Ariz. R. Crim.
- State v. Roper Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
-
State v. Roper
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
P. 32.2(b); ¶8 (App. 2014) (finding an untimely notice of post-conviction relief can be time barred regardless of the constitutional magnitude of the claim).
- State v. Lockwood Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
-
State v. Lockwood
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Rule 32.2(a), (b); ¶ 8, (providing that the time limits for filing a notice and petition for post-conviction relief are jurisdictional, and an untimely filed notice or petition shall be dismissed with prejudice under A.R.S.
- State v. Preayer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
-
State v. Preayer
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
(a defendant’s untimely claim for post-conviction relief is time-barred regardless of constitutional magnitude of underlying claim).
- State v. Gould Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
-
State v. Gould
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
The time limits for filing a notice and petition for post- conviction relief “are jurisdictional, and an untimely filed notice or petition shall be dismissed with prejudice.” Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13–4234(G) (2010); ¶ 8
- State v. Duran Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
-
State v. Duran
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
within the prescribed time was without fault on the defendant’s part.’” ¶ 9 (App. 2014) (quoting Ariz. R. Crim.
- State v. Sanchez Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
-
State v. Sanchez
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
P. 32.4(a); ¶¶ 6–8 (App. 2014); ¶ 13 (2009) (noting “few exceptions” to “general rule of preclusion” for claims in untimely or successive petitions).
- State v. Johnson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
-
State v. Johnson
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
¶ 8 (App. 2014) (post-conviction relief claim time-barred, regardless of degree of constitutional magnitude, because it was not timely presented).