Opinion
No. 1 CA-CR 20-0282 PRPC
10-27-2020
STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent, v. DELL RAINBOW VANDERSCHUIT, Petitioner.
COUNSEL Maricopa County Attorney's Office, Phoenix By Amanda M. Parker Counsel for Respondent Stephen M. Johnson, PC, Phoenix By Stephen M. Johnson Counsel for Petitioner
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 UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.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 Maricopa County
No. CR2008-009278-001
The Honorable Warren J. Granville, Judge (Retired)
REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED
COUNSEL
Maricopa County Attorney's Office, Phoenix
By Amanda M. Parker
Counsel for Respondent
Stephen M. Johnson, PC, Phoenix
By Stephen M. Johnson
Counsel for Petitioner
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Presiding Judge Jennifer M. Perkins, Judge David B. Gass, and Judge Michael J. Brown delivered the decision of the Court.
PER CURIAM:
¶1 Petitioner Dell Rainbow Vanderschuit seeks review of the superior court's order denying his petition for post-conviction relief, filed pursuant to Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.1. This is petitioner's fourth petition.
¶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. State v. Gutierrez, 229 Ariz. 573, 577, ¶ 19 (2012). It is petitioner's burden to show that the superior court abused its discretion by denying the petition for post-conviction relief. See State v. Poblete, 227 Ariz. 537, 538, ¶ 1 (App. 2011) (petitioner has burden of establishing abuse of discretion on review).
¶3 We have reviewed the record in this matter, the superior court's order denying the petition for post-conviction relief, and the petition for review. Petitioner has not established an abuse of discretion.
¶4 For the foregoing reasons, we grant review but deny relief.