State v. Barela, 1 CA-CR 15-0276-PRPC

Raymond Jose Barela pled guilty to two counts of manslaughter arising from the deaths of two separate victims and was sentenced to two consecutive 10.5‑year terms under a plea agreement.
The indictment originally included two manslaughter counts and one aggravated assault count; the State also alleged dangerousness, commission while on release, and prior convictions.
After sentencing Barela filed a notice of post-conviction relief; counsel reviewed the record, found no arguable issues, and Barela filed a pro se petition raising claims.
In his pro se petition Barela argued (1) double jeopardy/multiplicity (that convictions improperly duplicated charges) and (2) ineffective assistance for failing to raise a sleeping‑disorder defense (and claimed Miranda violations by investigators).
The superior court denied the petition; Barela sought review in the Court of Appeals, which granted review but denied relief.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Barela's convictions violated double jeopardy / were multiplicitous	Barela argued multiple convictions improperly punished the same conduct	State argued charges involved deaths of two separate victims, so separate convictions proper	Held: No double jeopardy; separate victims support separate convictions
Whether plea waived nonjurisdictional claims (including constitutional errors)	Barela contended post‑plea challenges to pre‑plea defects (e.g., multiplicity, Miranda) remain	State argued plea agreement waived all nonjurisdictional defenses and errors occurring before plea	Held: Plea waived all nonjurisdictional defects and constitutional claims arising prior to plea (citing precedent)
Whether counsel was ineffective for not obtaining testing for sleep disorder / for Miranda failures	Barela argued counsel/investigators failed to investigate or advise his rights; court should have ordered testing	State argued these claims were not raised below in the post‑conviction petition and thus are not preserved for review	Held: Claims denied as unpresented below; appellate review limited to issues raised in trial court

State v. Moreno, 134 Ariz. 199 (App. 1982) (a guilty plea waives nonjurisdictional defenses, errors, and defects occurring before the plea)
Tollett v. Henderson, 411 U.S. 258 (1973) (a defendant who pleads guilty waives claims of antecedent constitutional deprivations)
State v. Bennin, 107 Ariz. 1 (1971) (separate victims may justify separate convictions and avoid double jeopardy)
State v. Ramirez, 126 Ariz. 464 (App. 1980) (issues not raised in the trial court may not be raised on petition for review)
State v. Swoopes, 216 Ariz. 390 (App. 2007) (no review for fundamental error in post‑conviction relief proceedings)