STATE v. CONLEY
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOTICE: THIS DECISION DOES NOT CREATE LEGAL PRECEDENT AND MAY NOT BE CITED EXCEPT AS AUTHORIZED BY APPLICABLE RULES. See Ariz. R. Supreme Court 111(c); ARCAP 28(c); Ariz. R. Crim. P. 31.24 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF ARIZONA DIVISION ONE STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent, v. JOSEPH LEE CONLEY, Petitioner. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) DIVISION ONE FILED: 10/17/2013 RUTH A. WILLINGHAM, CLERK BY: GH 1 CA-CR 12-0569-PR DEPARTMENT C MEMORANDUM DECISION (Not for Publication Rule 111, Rules of the Arizona Supreme Court) Petition for Review from the Superior Court of Maricopa County Cause No. CR2004-035015-001 The Honorable David K. Udall, Judge REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED Joseph Lee Conley Pro Se Tucson PER CURIAM ¶1 A jury convicted petitioner Joseph Lee Conley of first degree murder and two counts of burglary. The superior court sentenced Conley to natural life for murder and concurrent terms of seven years' imprisonment for both counts of burglary. This court affirmed his convictions and sentences on direct appeal in State v. Conley, 1 CA-CR 07-0542 (Ariz. App. Jan. 2, 2009) (mem. dec.). Conley now seeks review of the summary dismissal of his successive notice of post-conviction relief pursuant to Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.9(c). This court reviews the summary dismissal of a notice of post-conviction for abuse of discretion. State v. Watton, 164 Ariz. 323, 325, 793 P.2d 80, 82 (1990). ¶2 In his petition for review, Conley argues he is entitled to be resentenced to less than natural life pursuant to Miller v. Alabama, 132 S. Ct. 2455 (2012). Conley argues Miller constitutes a significant change in the law and prohibits the imposition committed of natural life for juvenile the offenses just before his offenders. eighteenth Conley birthday. Miller did not ban the imposition of sentences to life without the possibility of parole for juveniles. Rather, Miller held mandatory sentences of life-without-parole for juvenile offenders violated the Eighth Amendment. Id. at 2464. Because Conley s sentence failed to to state natural a life was colorable 2 not mandatory, claim for he has relief. ¶3 For these reasons, this court grants Conley s petition for review and denies relief. /S/_____________________________ RANDALL M. HOWE, Presiding Judge /S/_____________________________ PATRICIA A. OROZCO, Judge /S/_____________________________ SAMUEL A. THUMMA, Judge 3 review of
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
