Is Arizona's collateral review scheme adequate to vindicate the constitutional rights of non-capital defendants?

Question Presented State and federal courts are jointly responsible for the enforcement of federal constitutional rights. Is Arizona’s collateral review scheme adequate to vindicate the constitutional rights of non-capital defendants when its superior courts only review claims of ineffective assistance of counsel on collateral review, even though Arizona’s collateral review rule, Rule 32.1(a), does not place any limit on the categories of constitutional claims a petitioner may raise in his first petition for postconviction relief? i