A. Forty-five days after the filing of the petition, the state shall file with the court a response. Affidavits, the record and other evidence that are available to the state and that contradict the allegations of the petition shall be attached to the response. On a showing of good cause, the state may be granted a thirty day extension in which to file a response. Additional extensions shall be granted only in extraordinary circumstances.
B. Within fifteen days after receipt of the response, the defendant may file a reply. Extensions shall be granted only in extraordinary circumstances.
C. The court shall review the petition within twenty days after the defendant's reply is due. On reviewing the petition, response, reply, files and records, and disregarding defects of form, the court shall identify all procedurally precluded claims under this article. If after identifying all precluded claims the court determines that no material issue of fact or law exists which would entitle the defendant to relief under this article and that no purpose would be served by any further proceedings, the court shall order the petition dismissed. If the court does not order the petition dismissed, the court shall set a hearing within thirty days on those claims that present a material issue of fact or law. If a hearing is ordered, the state shall notify the victim on request of the time and place of the hearing.
D. After the filing of a post-conviction relief petition, amendments are not permitted except by leave of the court on a showing of extraordinary circumstances.
Notes of Decisions
State of Arizona v. Phil Gutierrez, 278 P.3d 1276 (Ariz. 2012).
· cites it 4× “4(a), (c)(2), 32.5. Under Arizona’s postconviction relief scheme, the superior court must determine whether the petition “presents a material issue of fact or law which would entitle the defendant to relief.”
State v. McCall, 770 P.2d 1165 (Ariz. 1989).
· cites it 2× “*131 The re-sentencing record is ready for Appellate review. There is a total absence of any colorable sanity or competency issue here.”
State of Arizona v. Hon. cooper/bassett (Ariz. 2023).
· cites it 2× “See A.R.S. § 13-4236(C) (stating “the court shall order the petition dismissed” where “no material issue of fact or law exists which would entitle the defendant to relief”).”
State v. Cramer (Ariz. Ct. App. 2025).
· cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 13-4236(C); see also Amaral, 239 Ariz.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-4236(0) — 1 case
State of Arizona v. Phil Gutierrez, 278 P.3d 1276 (Ariz. 2012).
“4(a), (c)(2), 32.5. Under Arizona’s postconviction relief scheme, the superior court must determine whether the petition “presents a material issue of fact or law which would entitle the defendant to relief.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-4236(C) — 4 cases
State of Arizona v. Phil Gutierrez, 278 P.3d 1276 (Ariz. 2012).
“4(a), (c)(2), 32.5. Under Arizona’s postconviction relief scheme, the superior court must determine whether the petition “presents a material issue of fact or law which would entitle the defendant to relief.”
State v. McCall, 770 P.2d 1165 (Ariz. 1989).
“*131 The re-sentencing record is ready for Appellate review. There is a total absence of any colorable sanity or competency issue here.”
State of Arizona v. Hon. cooper/bassett (Ariz. 2023).
“See A.R.S. § 13-4236(C) (stating “the court shall order the petition dismissed” where “no material issue of fact or law exists which would entitle the defendant to relief”).”
State v. Cramer (Ariz. Ct. App. 2025).
“A.R.S. § 13-4236(C); see also Amaral, 239 Ariz.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.