Opinion
No. 1 CA-CR 16-0322 PRPC
01-25-2018
STATE OF ARIZONA, Petitioner, v. ALEX OSUNA, Respondent.
COUNSEL Yuma County Attorney's Office, Yuma By Charles V.S. Platt Counsel for Petitioner Sharmila Roy Attorney at Law, Laveen By Sharmila Roy Counsel for Respondent
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 UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.
Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Yuma County
No. S1400CR200901226
The Honorable Lisa W. Bleich, Judge Pro Tempore
REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED
COUNSEL
Yuma County Attorney's Office, Yuma
By Charles V.S. Platt
Counsel for Petitioner
Sharmila Roy Attorney at Law, Laveen
By Sharmila Roy
Counsel for Respondent
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Presiding Judge Lawrence F. Winthrop, Judge Jennifer B. Campbell, and Judge Paul J. McMurdie delivered the decision of the Court.
PER CURIAM :
¶1 Petitioner the State of Arizona seeks review of the superior court's order granting respondent Alex Osuna's petition for post-conviction relief, filed pursuant to Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.1.
¶2 Absent an abuse of discretion or error of law, this court will not disturb a superior court's ruling on a petition for post-conviction relief. See State v. Gutierrez, 229 Ariz. 573, 577, ¶ 19 (2012). It is a petitioner's burden to show the superior court abused its discretion in ruling on the petition for post-conviction relief. See State v. Poblete, 227 Ariz. 537, 538, ¶ 1 (App. 2011).
¶3 We have reviewed the record in this matter, the superior court's order granting the petition for post-conviction relief, and the petition for review. Petitioner has not established an abuse of discretion.
¶4 Accordingly, we grant review but deny relief.