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UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL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
ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS
DIVISION ONE
STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent,
v.
BRAULIO TREJO-MARTIN, Petitioner.
No. 1 CA-CR 14-0712 PRPC
FILED 1-12-2017
Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County
No. CR2010-134281-001
The Honorable Christopher T. Whitten, Judge
REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED
COUNSEL
Maricopa County Attorney's Office, Phoenix
By Diane Meloche
Counsel for Respondent
Braulio Trejo-Martin, Florence
Petitioner Pro Se
STATE v. TREJO-MARTIN
Decision of the Court
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Judge Paul J. McMurdie delivered the decision of the Court, in which
Presiding Judge Diane M. Johnsen and Judge Jon W. Thompson joined.
M c M U R D I E, Judge:
¶1 Petitioner Braulio Trejo-Martin petitions this court for review
of the summary dismissal of his second petition for post-conviction relief.
Trejo-Martin pled guilty to molestation of a child and two counts of
attempted molestation of a child in 2011. Trejo-Martin argues his trial
counsel and his first post-conviction relief counsel were ineffective. He
further argues the superior court erred when it imposed an aggravated
term of imprisonment for the count of molestation of a child.
¶2 We deny relief. Trejo-Martin could have raised the sentencing
issues as well as the claims of ineffective assistance of trial counsel in his
first post-conviction relief proceeding. He could have raised the claims of
ineffective assistance of his first post-conviction counsel in a timely second
petition for post-conviction relief in 2012. Any claim a defendant could have
raised in an earlier post-conviction relief proceeding is precluded. Ariz. R.
Crim. P. 32.2(a). None of the exceptions under Rule 32.2(b) apply.
¶3 We grant review but deny relief.
AMY M. WOOD • Clerk of the Court
FILED: AA
2