State v. Benitez

── State v. Benitez ── Case No.: 1 CA-CR 25-0347 PRPC Court: Court of Appeals of Arizona Date: April 01, 2026 Category: General NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION. UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE. IN THE ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION ONE STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent, v. BENNETT FRANCISCO BENITEZ, Petitioner. No. 1 CA-CR 25-0347 PRPC FILED 04-01-2026 Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County No. CR2016-143212-001 The Honorable Joseph P. Mikitish, Judge REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED COUNSEL Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, Phoenix By Faith Cheree Klepper Counsel for Respondent Law Office of Stephen M. Johnson, Inc., Phoenix By Stephen M. Johnson Co-Counsel for Petitioner  STATE v. BENITEZ Decision of the Court MEMORANDUM DECISION Judge Cynthia J. Bailey delivered the decision of the Court, in which Presiding Judge Daniel J. Kiley and Judge D. Steven Williams joined. B A I L E Y, Judge: ¶1 Bennett Francisco Benitez seeks review of the superior court’s order dismissing his post-conviction relief (“PCR”) petition. We grant review and deny relief. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY ¶2 In September 2016, police responded to a verbal altercation at a mobile home park involving Benitez. Police reported Benitez followed the victims to their trailer and intimidated them using gang signs and death threats. Police searched Benitez’s trailer and found gang paraphernalia associated with the East Side Los Guada Bloods gang. Benitez later admitted membership in the gang. ¶3 The State charged Benitez with three counts of threatening or intimidating, class three felonies; three counts of threatening or intimidating, class six felonies; and one count of assisting a criminal street gang, a class three felony. ¶4 Before trial, Benitez moved to exclude evidence of his prior gang membership. The superior court partially granted his motion but allowed the State to introduce eye-witness testimony along with photographs, clothing, and paraphernalia seized from Benitez’s trailer to show gang-affiliation. During the eight-day jury trial, the State called gang experts who testified Benitez acted with the intent to promote or assist criminal conduct by a criminal street gang. After the State rested its case, Benitez rested without presenting evidence. On multiple trial dates, Benitez failed to appear, prompting the superior court to issue a bench warrant before the case was submitted to the jury. ¶5 The jury convicted Benitez on all charges and found the presence of several aggravating factors. He was sentenced to concurrent terms of imprisonment, with the longest term being 15 years. On appeal, we vacated Benitez’s three convictions for threatening or intimidating as class six felonies but affirmed his convictions and sentences on the 2  STATE v. BENITEZ Decision of the Court remaining counts. State v. Benitez, 1 CA-CR 19-0458, 2021 WL 4097524 (Ariz. App. Aug. 5, 2021) (mem. decision). ¶6 Benitez timely filed a PCR notice after requesting multiple extensions. The superior court summarily dismissed Benitez’s PCR petition. Benitez timely petitioned for review. DISCUSSION ¶7 We review a superior court’s ruling on a PCR petition for an abuse of discretion, which occurs if the “court makes an error of law or fails to adequately investigate the facts necessary to support its decision.” State v. Pandeli, 242 Ariz. 175, 180, ¶ 4 (2017