History
  • No items yet
midpage
State v. Alvarez
1 CA-CR 15-0363-PRPC
| Ariz. Ct. App. | May 18, 2017
|
Check Treatment
Case Information

*1 NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION. UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.

IN THE

A RIZONA C OURT OF A PPEALS

D IVISION O NE

STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent , v.

KIMBERLY ANN ALVAREZ, Petitioner . No. 1 CA-CR 15-0363 PRPC FILED 5-18-2017

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Mohave County No. CR-2012-00605

The Honorable Rick A. Williams, Judge REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED COUNSEL

Mohave County Attorney’s Office, Kingman

By Matthew J. Smith

Counsel for Respondent

Kimberly Ann Alvarez, Goodyear

Petitioner

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Judge Donn Kessler delivered the decision of the Court, in which Judge Peter B. Swann and Judge Kent E. Cattani joined.

*2 STATE v. ALVAREZ Decision of the Court K E S S L E R , Judge:

¶1 Petitioner Kimberly Ann Alvarez petitions this court for review from the dismissal of her petition for post-conviction relief. Alvarez pled guilty to possession of dangerous drugs for sale and the superior court sentenced her to a mitigated term of seven years’ imprisonment. Alvarez argues her trial counsel was ineffective when she failed to interview Alvarez’s codefendant. Alvarez argues that had counsel interviewed her codefendant, she would have learned exculpatory information that might have caused the court to impose a shorter sentence. The minimum sentence available pursuant to the plea agre ement was five years’ imprisonment. [1] ¶2 We deny relief. The superior court that dismissed Alvarez’s petition for post-conviction relief was the same court that sentenced her. The court held the information in the co defendant’s affidavit would have had no effect on the court’s decision to impose a seven -year sentence even if known by the court prior to sentencing. To state a colorable claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, a defendant must show not only that counsel ’ s performance fell below objectively reasonable standards, but that the deficient performance prejudiced the defendant. Strickland v. Washington , 466 U.S. 668, 687-88 (1984). Because the superior court would have imposed the same sentence even in light of the additional information, Alvarez has failed to establish counsel’s failure to interview the codefendant caused her any prejudice.

¶3 We grant review but deny relief.

[1] Alvarez does not seek to withdraw from her plea but seeks only to be resentenced. 2

Case Details

Case Name: State v. Alvarez
Court Name: Court of Appeals of Arizona
Date Published: May 18, 2017
Docket Number: 1 CA-CR 15-0363-PRPC
Court Abbreviation: Ariz. Ct. App.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.