469 P.3d 472
Ariz. Ct. App.2020Background
- Macias, a former elementary and sex-ed teacher, was accused by multiple former students (including E.V.) of inappropriate touching and showing pornographic material; police seized explicit materials and videos from his home and phone.
- A jury convicted Macias on multiple counts; the superior court imposed life without release for 35 years plus additional consecutive and concurrent terms; on direct appeal this court vacated some convictions/sentences and affirmed others.
- Macias filed a Rule 32 post-conviction petition alleging juror misconduct (premature deliberations), ineffective assistance of counsel (appellate and trial), failure to investigate a potentially stale search warrant/magistrate impartiality, and constitutional/technical defects in harmful-to-minor charges.
- The superior court dismissed the petition as failing to present colorable claims; Macias sought review.
- The appellate court granted review but denied relief, holding: (1) no colorable juror-misconduct claim from intra-jury premature deliberations; (2) appellate counsel was not ineffective for failing to anticipate later legal developments; (3) spoliation doctrine will not excuse a failure to plead a colorable ineffective-assistance claim; and (4) counsel was not ineffective for not raising a technical citation error or vagueness challenge to the harmful-to-minor statute.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Macias) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Juror misconduct — premature deliberations | Jurors deliberated before close of evidence, depriving him of impartial jury | Juror statements were intra-jury, no extraneous influence, and affidavits did not show verdict based on anything but trial evidence | No colorable claim; summary dismissal affirmed (no presumed prejudice) |
| Ineffective assistance — appellate counsel failed to challenge child-molestation statutes | Counsel should have attacked statutes as unconstitutional (May v. Ryan line) | Counsel reasonably selected stronger issues; cannot be faulted for not predicting future law | No colorable claim; appellate counsel not ineffective |
| Ineffective assistance — trial counsel failed to investigate magistrate/stale warrant; spoliation | Counsel should have investigated magistrate impartiality and court records; missing records justify spoliation inference | Presumption of judicial impartiality; no evidence of systemic bias; spoliation doctrine not applicable to excuse pleading burden | No colorable claim; counsel not ineffective; spoliation inapplicable |
| Ineffective assistance — failure to challenge indictment citation and vagueness of "harmful to minors" | Indictment failed to cite definitional section and statute is unconstitutionally vague | Citation omission was technical with no prejudice; vagueness challenges previously rejected; counsel properly prioritized issues on appeal | No colorable claim; counsel not ineffective |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishes ineffective-assistance standard)
- United States v. Angulo, 4 F.3d 843 (9th Cir.) (single partial juror violates fair-trial right)
- United States v. Resko, 3 F.3d 684 (3d Cir.) (distinguishing intra-jury vs. extra-jury communications)
- United States v. Gianakos, 415 F.3d 912 (8th Cir.) (premature intra-jury remarks do not necessarily warrant reversal absent extrinsic influence)
- State v. Hyde, 186 Ariz. 252 (good-faith exception applies unless magistrate shows systemic partiality)
- State v. Holle, 240 Ariz. 300 (Arizona Supreme Court: lack of sexual motivation may be treated as affirmative defense)
- State v. Amaral, 239 Ariz. 217 (standard for whether a Rule 32 petition alleges facts that would probably have changed the verdict)
- State v. Bennett, 213 Ariz. 562 (standards for stating a colorable ineffective-assistance claim)
- Jones v. Barnes, 463 U.S. 745 (appellate counsel entitled to select most promising issues)