State v. Wright, 1 CA-CR 15-0645-PRPC

Matthew Charles Wright pled guilty to two counts of attempted molestation of a child and one count of attempted sexual conduct with a minor (all Class 3 felonies and dangerous crimes against children).
In October 2010 the superior court sentenced Wright to 10 years' imprisonment on one attempted-molestation conviction and imposed lifetime probation on the other two convictions.
In August 2015 Wright sought permission to file an untimely petition for post-conviction relief (PCR), providing no factual allegations or explanation for the delay, stating only he would present claims if permission were granted.
The superior court treated the filing as a notice of PCR and summarily dismissed it for untimeliness and for failure to state reasons excusing the late filing.
Wright argued on review that the sentences were illegal because probation for a Class 3 felony cannot exceed five years; he sought relief via the untimely PCR notice.
The appeals court granted review but denied relief, finding the dismissal proper and Wright’s sentencing claim meritless because sex-offense statutes authorized lifetime probation.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether superior court erred by dismissing untimely PCR notice	Wright: court imposed illegal sentences (probation capped at 5 years for Class 3 felonies)	Respondent: notice was untimely and lacked reasons excusing delay; dismissal proper	Dismissal affirmed — notice untimely, failed to explain delay; summary dismissal proper
Whether an untimely PCR may raise an illegal-sentence claim	Wright: illegal sentence claim can be raised despite untimeliness	Respondent: untimely petitions are limited to Rule 32.1(d)-(h) exceptions; illegal-sentence claims fall under Rule 32.1(c) and are thus not allowed in untimely filings	Court held illegal-sentence claim not cognizable in untimely petition under Rule 32.1 exceptions
Whether lifetime probation was lawful for Wright’s convictions	Wright: probation exceeded statutory 5-year maximum for Class 3 felonies	Respondent: statutory provisions for sex offenses permit lifetime probation	Court held lifetime probation authorized under sex-offense statute; claim without merit
Whether review may be upheld on any alternative basis	Wright: sought relief on sentencing grounds	Respondent: alternative grounds support dismissal (procedural default and statutory authorization)	Court affirmed and denied relief, noting appellate review may rest on any record-supported basis

State v. Bennett, 213 Ariz. 562 (discussing standard of review for denial of PCR)
State v. Robinson, 153 Ariz. 191 (appellate rulings may be upheld on any basis supported by the record)
State v. Shrum, 220 Ariz. 115 (limits on raising claims in untimely PCR proceedings)
State v. Cazares, 205 Ariz. 425 (illegal-sentence claims are encompassed by Rule 32.1(c), not within exceptions for untimely petitions)