Free Additional Attachments to Main Document - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

EXHIBIT 13
Case 2:OO—cv—O1118—NVW Document 109-5 Filed O3/28/2007 Page1 of 3

f..;; j§Q.l ; § ‘fT§ Z§» f f°; “i f ` i i -P ` I ’ C P ? “V ¢ ; ; `
,· ‘ ». _ . . d »—,, at ‘ A
‘ . ‘ ‘ APPEALS _ *:1 ‘‘»»·* ` 4 ‘·‘· =>¤·"** "’?°"" " ”" °·°*· " AAA”
Oy Bows Refund SUPERIOR coua·r‘or= Amzomx ·
r·$ ’ s _F°"*"“'° * » MARICOPA enum-Y Receivedr ‘ APR 2 #9,85 ‘
[J icamoe oe venue _ A 1985
3 ( g wav sees Processed; APR L3
’ aemmos .
semremcmo L __]
- vnvum Kanwots, c:PPP
CCl7—67725 April l, 1985 THE HON. JAMES MOELLER V. Dahlquist,
Div Dare Judge or Commussioner Qepugy
NQ CR»l237ll .
STATE OF ARIZONA we Attorney General,
By: Jack Roberts
vs
STEVEN CRAIG JAMES J. Douglas McVay
Steven Craig James,
P.O. Box B—¢6l50, ‘
Arizona State Prison,
Florence, AZ 85232
Following the filing of Defendant's Petition for Post-Conviction Relief,
counsel was appointed, leave was granted to file a Supplemental Petition, a Supple-
mental Petition was filed, the State has responded, and the Court is advised that
the Petitioner waives Reply Memorandum.
The Court has reviewed the Original Petition and Response and the Supple-
mental Petition and Response. Based on such review, the Court has determined that
summary disposition of this Petition and Supplemental Petition pursuant to Rule °
32.6(c) is merited. The issues sought to be raised are, in the Court's opinion,
clearly precluded by the provisions of Rule 32.2(a) (3), even putting aside the
requirement that the allegations of alleged fact are not under oath. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that the Petition is dismissed.
_ The Court notes that the Petitioner has written e letter to the Court re-·
questing appointment of a new attorney for purposes of these Rule 32 proceedings. if
The Petitioner was represented. at trial by counsel, on Appeal by separate court-
appointed counsel, and is now being represented in the instant proceedings by neu
C¤uI‘t-appointed counsel. Petitioner's letter to the court does no more Page /0 .
Foam asm sev 7-as (Continued)
Case 2:00-cv-01118-NVW Document 109-5 Filed O3/28/2007 Page 2 of 3

— <
B°"°S ;§;§Q;,E - ` MARICOPA COUNTY Zum. ossmxeunom cerrrea
cHAMG&or=veNue! Réwveh APR 2 ,1565 ‘
wav Fees Q “' ‘
aemANos prcqggxi APR Q 3 *1%
semvzmomo 1 L .1
_. vuvmu l· Cc17—67725 Am:11 1, 1985 THE HON. Jams MOELLCELQ V. DahJ.¤u1sc,
Div Daze Judge or Comrmssxoner Oenuzy
No. CR—3.237ll STATE OF ARIZONA vs STnVt.°\’ CRAIG JAMES (Continued)
than indicate that he would prefer yet another court—appo:Lnted attorney. No
grounds appearing therefor,
IT IS ORDERED that, to the extent the letter is considered to be a request
for a substitution of counsel, it is now denied.
-oaM umn V Pm [
r · E 7-83
Case 2:00-cvgO1118—NVW Document 109-5 Filed O3/28/2007_ Pag_e 3 of 3

Case 2:00-cv-01118-NVW

Document 109-5

Filed 03/28/2007

Page 1 of 3

Case 2:00-cv-01118-NVW

Document 109-5

Filed 03/28/2007

Page 2 of 3

Case 2:00-cv-01118-NVW

Document 109-5

Filed 03/28/2007

Page 3 of 3