In Hill v. Hall ex rel. County of Yuma, 194 Ariz. 255, 980 P.2d 967 (App. 1999), the Court examined whether a defendant who has exercised his right to a change of judge under Rule 10.2 is entitled to an automatic change of judge under Rule. 17.4(g). The Court determined that a defendant may exercise "only one peremptory challenge of a judge by way of either Rule 10.2 or Rule 17.4(g)." Hill, 194 Ariz. at 258, P 10, 980 P.2d at 970. Recognizing a complementary relationship between the two rules, we explained that Rule 17.4(g) "extends" the opportunity provided under Rule 10.2(b) to request an automatic change of judge "once the time period has passed allowing for such a request under Rule 10.2" because of "the potential prejudice of failed plea negotiations." Id. at 257, PP 7, 8, 980 P.2d at 969. The Court noted that "the purpose of Rule 17.4(g) is limited to extending to the defendant the opportunity to move for an automatic change of judge once the time period has passed allowing for such a request under Rule 10.2." Id. at P 8.