Title: Noble v. State
Citation: 109 Ariz. 537, 514 P.2d 458
Docket Number: N/A
State: Arizona
Issuer: Arizona Supreme Court
Date: September 14, 1973

109 Ariz. 537 (1973) 514 P.2d 458 Andrew Milo NOBLE, Petitioner, v. The STATE of Arizona, Respondent. Dallas RICHIE, Jr., Petitioner, v. Harold CARDWELL, Warden, Respondent. Nos. H-281-3 and H-671. Supreme Court of Arizona, In Banc. September 14, 1973. Andrew Milo Noble, Dallas Richie, Jr., in pro per. Gary K. Nelson, Atty. Gen., Phoenix, for respondents. *538 PER CURIAM. These are petitions for writs of habeas corpus filed in this court on 7 September 1973 and 11 September 1973. By this opinion we decide only one question and that is: Are these petitions, commenced after 1 September 1973, but based upon an initial criminal proceeding commenced prior to 1 September 1973, governed by Rule 32 of the new Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure 1973, 17 A.R.S.? Rule 32 of the Rules of Criminal Procedure 1973 sets forth the procedure to be followed in seeking post-conviction relief in the courts of the State of Arizona. Rule 32.3 reads as follows: Rule 32.4 provides: However, Rule 1.5 of the rules reads as follows: The apprehension, adjudication, and disposition of a criminal matter is part of one continuous process from arrest to determination on appeal, and the new Rules of Criminal Procedure apply only to those cases commenced after 1 September 1973. Post-conviction relief under Rule 32, however, is a distinct and separate adjudication in that new relief is asked for and a new hearing may be required and therefore a new action, even though, for purposes of uniformity, completeness, and convenience in filing and hearing, the matter is considered "a part of the original criminal action." Rule 32.3, Rules of Criminal Procedure 1973. We therefore hold that although based upon convictions resulting from matters which were commenced before 1 September 1973, a petition for writ of habeas corpus or any other petition for post-conviction relief under Rule 32 is a new action for the purposes of the 1973 criminal rules and is considered "commenced" on the day it is filed. It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Rule 32.3 of the Rules of Criminal Procedure 1973, that the two above captioned petitions be transferred to the Superior Court of Maricopa County for such further action consistent with Rule 32, Rules of Criminal Procedure 1973, as that court might deem appropriate and proper under the circumstances.