Sample filings

Public criminal motions, briefs, and opinions from Arizona courts (Maricopa and statewide), collected by Criminal Defense Resources™ as educational examples for people representing themselves (pro per/pro se) and the families supporting them.

What these are (and are not)

• Are: official or publicly posted PDFs from Arizona courts and related court sites, linked for learning.
• Are not: blank court forms, fill-in templates, or document-preparation services. For official self-help forms, use the Arizona court links at the bottom of this page.
• How to use: read the plain-English note on each card, open the official PDF, and notice structure (caption, issues, argument headings, request for relief). Compare to the official forms for your court if you need something to file.

Brady / discovery

• Post-conviction Brady / Napue petition

  State v. Murray Hooper · Maricopa County Superior Court · CR 0000-121686 (petition filed Nov. 4, 2022)

  Content note: This public filing names murder victims. We link only to the official court PDF and do not host a copy or quote victim names here.

  Shows how a federal public defender framed a late post-conviction claim that the State withheld favorable evidence (Brady) and allowed false testimony (Napue). Useful to see petition structure and issue framing — not a model to copy into your case.

  Outcome: Relief was not granted. Hooper was executed on November 16, 2022.

  • Official PDF (Ninth Circuit CDN) →

• Special-action Brady disclosure order

  Hernandez v. Hon. Sukenic · Arizona Supreme Court · CR-22-0270-PR (Maricopa CR2008-124043-001); decision order Mar. 2, 2023

  Shows how Arizona's high court handled a Brady disclosure dispute: review was granted and part of a lower order was vacated so the State had to review its file for Brady/Giglio material. Good educational reading on discovery and disclosure duties.

  Outcome: Review granted; order partly vacated. The State was required to conduct a Brady/Giglio file review.

  • Arizona Supreme Court decision order (PDF) →

Rule 32 / 33 post-conviction relief (PCR)

• Rule 33 PCR / Proposition 207 defense briefs

  State v. Bennett Laquan Williams · Arizona Supreme Court · CR-23-0068-PR (Maricopa CR2016-002220-001)

  Content note: Sex-trafficking case. Official PDFs may contain sensitive details. Do not copy victim names into any notes or filings you prepare.

  Shows how a university post-conviction clinic answered a State's petition for review and later filed a supplemental brief on Rule 33 PCR and Proposition 207 issues. Note: the "Petition for Review" on the court page is the State's filing; the defense responses are linked below.

  Outcome: Defense prevailed. On August 6, 2024, the Arizona Supreme Court reversed and remanded.

  • Defense Response to Petition for Review (PDF, Apr. 14, 2023) →
  • Defense Supplemental Brief (PDF, Sep. 20, 2023) →

• Rule 32 successive PCR / ineffective assistance (parole advice)

  State v. Larry Dean Anderson · Arizona Supreme Court (Pima County; COA 2 CA-CR 2022-0121-PR) · CR-23-0008-PR; petition filed Jan. 9, 2023

  Shows a successive Rule 32 petition for review focused on ineffective assistance of counsel about parole eligibility advice. Useful to see how IAC and successive PCR issues are framed on review.

  Outcome: Defense prevailed. On May 2, 2024, the Arizona Supreme Court reversed and remanded for an evidentiary hearing (257 Ariz. 226).

  • Petition for Review of Third Petition (PDF) →
  • Case page with briefs (Arizona Judicial Branch) →

Bail / release

• Release / bail amicus brief (ACLU / NACDL)

  Simpson / Martinez v. Hons. Miller / Steinle · Arizona Supreme Court · CR-16-0227-PR

  Content note: Case involves minor victims. Use initials only (for example, D.D. / D.L.). Do not expand initials into full names.

  Shows how national defense organizations briefed Arizona's categorical no-bail rule for certain charges. Educational example of due-process arguments for individualized release determinations (related opinion: Simpson v. Miller, 241 Ariz. 341).

  Outcome: Defense prevailed. February 9, 2017 decision: 241 Ariz. 341.

  • ACLU/NACDL amicus brief (PDF) →

Willits / lost evidence

• Willits instruction (lost or destroyed evidence) — defense win

  State v. Glissendorf · Arizona Supreme Court · CR-13-0388-PR; opinion July 18, 2014

  Content note: Child-molestation case. We link the official opinion only and do not quote victim names or case details here.

  Shows when Arizona courts require a Willits instruction: if the State lost or destroyed evidence that might have helped the defense, the jury may be told it can infer the evidence would have been unfavorable to the State. Opinion only (briefs not freely posted).

  Outcome: Defense prevailed. Reversed and remanded (235 Ariz. 147).

  • Arizona Supreme Court opinion (PDF) →

• Willits instruction — State win (counterpoint)

  State v. Pablo Isaac Hernandez · Arizona Supreme Court · CR-19-0193-PR; opinion October 27, 2020

  Counterpoint to Glissendorf: shows limits on Willits relief when the lost-evidence showing is not enough under Arizona law. Reading both opinions helps learners see how courts draw the line.

  Outcome: State prevailed on the Willits issue in this opinion.

  • Arizona Supreme Court opinion (PDF) →

Official Arizona self-help forms

For fillable or printable court forms and self-represented litigant guidance, use these official sites (verified live). They are the courts' own pages — not ours.

• Arizona Judicial Branch Self-Service Center
• Arizona Self-Service Center: Criminal Law
• Arizona Criminal Law Forms
• Arizona Self-Service Center Forms index
• Arizona fee waiver and deferral forms
• Maricopa Superior Court Law Library Resource Center (LLRC)
• Maricopa LLRC criminal court forms
• Maricopa: how to represent yourself in court
• Maricopa EZ Court Forms

Forms and instructions change. Always download the current version from the court site for your county and case type. If you cannot afford a lawyer, ask the court about appointed counsel.