Background
Matthew Nicholas Brown was indicted in 2022 and later pleaded guilty and was sentenced on three counts: child abuse, sexual conduct with a minor, and aggravated assault. In March 2026, he filed a notice seeking post-conviction relief under Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 33.4, which governs proceedings following a guilty plea, but had not yet filed his post-conviction relief petition.
Brown moved under Rule 33.6(b)(1) to depose or examine the State’s sexual abuse nurse examiner. The State opposed the request based on authorities addressing Rule 32 and the rules as they existed before amendments effective in 2020. The superior court denied the motion on the ground that discovery was unavailable before Brown filed his petition. Brown sought special-action review.
The Court’s Holding
The Arizona Court of Appeals accepted special-action jurisdiction because Brown had no equally plain, speedy, and adequate remedy by appeal. It held that the superior court committed legal error by treating the absence of a filed post-conviction relief petition as a categorical bar to discovery.
The court explained that Rule 33.6(b)(1), adopted as part of the 2020 restructuring of Arizona’s post-conviction rules, expressly permits discovery after a pleading defendant files a Rule 33.4 notice but before filing a petition, provided the defendant shows a substantial need for the material or information to prepare the case. The court vacated the denial and remanded for the superior court to decide whether Brown made that showing; it did not itself decide whether Brown was entitled to the requested deposition.
Key Takeaways
- A defendant pursuing post-conviction relief after a guilty plea may seek discovery before filing the petition if the defendant has filed the required Rule 33.4 notice.
- Pre-petition discovery under Rule 33.6(b)(1) requires a showing of substantial need for the requested material or information to prepare the defendant’s case.
- The 2020 rule changes displaced the earlier rule-based limitation recognized in Canion v. Cole, which had permitted discovery only after a post-conviction petition was filed.
Why It Matters
The decision clarifies that Arizona’s current post-conviction rules provide a mechanism for defendants to obtain information needed to prepare a petition, rather than requiring them to file the petition first. Courts must apply the substantial-need standard to a qualifying pre-petition request instead of denying discovery solely because no petition has yet been filed.
The ruling also underscores the distinction between Rule 32 proceedings following a trial and Rule 33 proceedings following a guilty plea, as well as the importance of applying the versions of those rules effective since 2020.