05-07-2015, 07:23 PM
Alice Munce post and my understanding combined.
I'm @ & Alice is ®!
® From AZ rules of criminal procedure: " Ineffective assistance of counsel claims:
All ineffective assistance of counsel claims MUST be raised in petitions for post-conviction relief.
Any such claims raised by direct appeal will NOT be addressed by appellate courts regardless of merit.
See State v. Spreitz, 202 Ariz. 1, 39 P.3d 525 (2002).
@ So Alice is saying Direct appeal issue and PCR issues do not intermingle, agreeing' with confusion rewording.
Their are 3 Courts available to Jodi = JSS trial court, 3 judge appeal court and 5 judge Arizona Supreme court, later district court and USSC.
PCR is Not Arizona appellate court directly' unless JSS finds fault, if fault is found JSS must ask Appellate Court for recommendation ruling, trial court cannot 'Case Law' only Arizona Supreme court thru Arizona appellate court ruling, could then use JSS to overrule any trial fault.
Relief means just that' a reduction of sentence for cause relating to Direct Appeal overruling.
Most often PCR filings follow Direct Appeal over-rulings' or when overruling is assumed assured, telling us the early PCR is because JSS is convinced Jodi has arguments of Nurmi issues, actually Jodi with early PCR tables more arguments' because Direct Appeal only permits limited words.
Nurmi not liking Jodi and slouching during the first trial, and Martinez intentionally dropping the camera type of arguments are PCR appealable not Direct Appeal issues.
Being charged for Murder with the Death Penalty argument is Direct appeal' including things like, JSS rulings against admitting forged letters, even allowing Jodi secret testimony released and Martinez allowed to view Jodi visitation records = that was before JSS by Judge Duncan and higher Arizona courts overruled.
Remember appeal words are limited' only 3 issues normally.
® “Where ineffective assistance of counsel claims are raised, or could have been raised, in a Rule 32 post-conviction relief proceeding, subsequent claims of ineffective assistance will be deemed waived and precluded.” Id., citing State v. Conner, 163 Ariz. 97, 100, 786 P.2d 948, 951 (1990)."
So ineffective counsel won't be considered by the direct appeal court.
Failure to do what JSS did, would be potential judicial error later on. It also will force the PD office to deal with this immediately. Looks like she wants the issue raised early, maybe before the DA.
@ Alice tells 1 year of paralegal' and is learning' I finally agree with what she tells here.
But' the PCR is ineffective council issues' and certain ineffective council issues can be also Direct Appeal issues, Direct appeal would only be Nurmi procedure, MDLR procedure, Martinez procedure, Florez procedure and JSS or higher court procedures!
So in essence Jodis mother was correct' Jodi has Two free appeals, PCR and Direct, JSS has filed for Jodi a PCR appeal, (earlier than is normally) and a direct appeal would = normally a-front the Post Conviction 'RELIEF' of reason to reduce sentence.
Jodi will argue the DP tabled equated overcharging to jury instructions' in direct appeal and that Nurmi informed Jury of many facts and lots of possibilities (= shot Travis sitting in shower, retrial opening statement) that aided the Prosecution.
Dan Ryack claimed weeks ago that he was Jodis appeals attorney. (We have seen no filings or conformation from the courts), he would be used for direct appeal then PCR if case won, PCR's early public defender office involvement would be a conflict of multiple attorneys. So Dan Ryack must wait to file anything beyond intent to file a Direct Appeal and that depends on Jodi money Not being exposed at July first restitution hearing.
A Free Public Defender Direct Appeal remains optional until after restitution hearing when time to appeal expires. PCR to JSS appeal could be put on the back-burner to Direct Appeal results, or to Dan Ryack retainer representation, I myself believe Public Defender office will again inform JSS refusal to handle Jodi and if so Jodi will want Dan Ryack as court appointed for Direct Appeal having PCR a conditional free hearing that follows Direct Appeal reversal of judgement = Jodi assumption.
I'm @ & Alice is ®!
® From AZ rules of criminal procedure: " Ineffective assistance of counsel claims:
All ineffective assistance of counsel claims MUST be raised in petitions for post-conviction relief.
Any such claims raised by direct appeal will NOT be addressed by appellate courts regardless of merit.
See State v. Spreitz, 202 Ariz. 1, 39 P.3d 525 (2002).
@ So Alice is saying Direct appeal issue and PCR issues do not intermingle, agreeing' with confusion rewording.
Their are 3 Courts available to Jodi = JSS trial court, 3 judge appeal court and 5 judge Arizona Supreme court, later district court and USSC.
PCR is Not Arizona appellate court directly' unless JSS finds fault, if fault is found JSS must ask Appellate Court for recommendation ruling, trial court cannot 'Case Law' only Arizona Supreme court thru Arizona appellate court ruling, could then use JSS to overrule any trial fault.
Relief means just that' a reduction of sentence for cause relating to Direct Appeal overruling.
Most often PCR filings follow Direct Appeal over-rulings' or when overruling is assumed assured, telling us the early PCR is because JSS is convinced Jodi has arguments of Nurmi issues, actually Jodi with early PCR tables more arguments' because Direct Appeal only permits limited words.
Nurmi not liking Jodi and slouching during the first trial, and Martinez intentionally dropping the camera type of arguments are PCR appealable not Direct Appeal issues.
Being charged for Murder with the Death Penalty argument is Direct appeal' including things like, JSS rulings against admitting forged letters, even allowing Jodi secret testimony released and Martinez allowed to view Jodi visitation records = that was before JSS by Judge Duncan and higher Arizona courts overruled.
Remember appeal words are limited' only 3 issues normally.
® “Where ineffective assistance of counsel claims are raised, or could have been raised, in a Rule 32 post-conviction relief proceeding, subsequent claims of ineffective assistance will be deemed waived and precluded.” Id., citing State v. Conner, 163 Ariz. 97, 100, 786 P.2d 948, 951 (1990)."
So ineffective counsel won't be considered by the direct appeal court.
Failure to do what JSS did, would be potential judicial error later on. It also will force the PD office to deal with this immediately. Looks like she wants the issue raised early, maybe before the DA.
@ Alice tells 1 year of paralegal' and is learning' I finally agree with what she tells here.
But' the PCR is ineffective council issues' and certain ineffective council issues can be also Direct Appeal issues, Direct appeal would only be Nurmi procedure, MDLR procedure, Martinez procedure, Florez procedure and JSS or higher court procedures!
So in essence Jodis mother was correct' Jodi has Two free appeals, PCR and Direct, JSS has filed for Jodi a PCR appeal, (earlier than is normally) and a direct appeal would = normally a-front the Post Conviction 'RELIEF' of reason to reduce sentence.
Jodi will argue the DP tabled equated overcharging to jury instructions' in direct appeal and that Nurmi informed Jury of many facts and lots of possibilities (= shot Travis sitting in shower, retrial opening statement) that aided the Prosecution.
Dan Ryack claimed weeks ago that he was Jodis appeals attorney. (We have seen no filings or conformation from the courts), he would be used for direct appeal then PCR if case won, PCR's early public defender office involvement would be a conflict of multiple attorneys. So Dan Ryack must wait to file anything beyond intent to file a Direct Appeal and that depends on Jodi money Not being exposed at July first restitution hearing.
A Free Public Defender Direct Appeal remains optional until after restitution hearing when time to appeal expires. PCR to JSS appeal could be put on the back-burner to Direct Appeal results, or to Dan Ryack retainer representation, I myself believe Public Defender office will again inform JSS refusal to handle Jodi and if so Jodi will want Dan Ryack as court appointed for Direct Appeal having PCR a conditional free hearing that follows Direct Appeal reversal of judgement = Jodi assumption.