State v. Heitzmann, 1 CA-CR 16-0162-PRPC

Petitioner Albert Karl Heitzmann was convicted of misconduct involving weapons (four-year prison term) and, after retrial, threatening or intimidating (suspended sentence, three years probation). Appellate courts previously affirmed those convictions.
Heitzmann filed a timely pro se Rule 32 petition challenging the weapons conviction, asserting ineffective assistance of counsel, a Supreme Court-based constitutional claim, and actual innocence; the superior court denied relief for failure to state a colorable claim.
This court granted review in the earlier Rule 32 matter and denied relief on the weapons conviction.
After mandate issued in the related matter, Heitzmann filed a Rule 32 petition attacking the threatening/intimidating conviction; the superior court dismissed the petition and denied relief.
Heitzmann petitioned for review of that denial, but the appellate court found his petition did not comply with Rule 32.9 requirements (insufficient specificity, incorporation by reference, lack of record citations and legal authority) and therefore treated claims as waived.
The court granted review but denied relief, concluding there is no fundamental-error review in Rule 32 proceedings and that strict compliance with Rule 32 is required.

Issue	Heitzmann's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Whether superior court committed fundamental error in dismissing Rule 32 petition	Dismissal was fundamentally erroneous	Rule 32 proceedings do not include fundamental-error review; dismissal proper for noncompliance	No fundamental-error review; claim fails
Whether Heitzmann’s petition complied with Rule 32.9 requirements	Petition sufficient and should be considered (relies on incorporated filings)	Petition failed to present specific claims, argument, authority, and record cites as required	Petition did not comply; claims abandoned/waived
Whether incorporation of superior court filings by reference is permissible in petition for review	Incorporation of prior filings is acceptable to raise issues	Rule forbids incorporation by reference (except appendices); petition must state issues and cite record	Incorporation by reference disallowed; petition deficient
Whether insufficient argument and lack of citations waive claims on review	Arguments should be considered on merits despite procedural defects	Insufficient argument and citations constitute waiver	Insufficiently developed claims are waived

State v. Gutierrez, 229 Ariz. 573 (App. 2012) (appellate review standard for superior court Rule 32 rulings)
Canion v. Cole, 210 Ariz. 598 (App. 2005) (Rule 32 requires strict compliance; not a mere formality)
State v. Smith, 184 Ariz. 456 (1996) (no fundamental-error review in Rule 32 proceedings)
State v. Bolton, 182 Ariz. 290 (1995) (insufficient argument waives claims on review)
State v. French, 198 Ariz. 119 (App. 2000) (petitions that incorporate filings and fail Rule 32.9 requirements may be summarily rejected)