Opinion
1 CA-CR 23-0250 PRPC
10-03-2024
STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent, v. PEDRO CISNEROS ARIAS, Petitioner.
Coconino County Attorney's Office, Flagstaff By William P. Ring Counsel for Respondent Pedro Cisneros Arias, Buckeye Petitioner
Not for Publication - Rule 111(c), Rules of the Arizona Supreme Court
Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Coconino County No. CR 2004-0326 The Honorable Stacy Lynn Krueger, Judge
Coconino County Attorney's Office, Flagstaff By William P. Ring Counsel for Respondent
Pedro Cisneros Arias, Buckeye Petitioner
Presiding Judge Maria Elena Cruz, Judge Samuel A. Thumma and Judge Andrew M. Jacobs delivered the following decision.
MEMORANDUM DECISION
PER CURIAM.
¶1 Petitioner Pedro Cisneros Arias seeks review of the superior court's order denying his petition for post-conviction relief. This is Arias' second 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. See 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. We find the petitioner has not established an abuse of discretion.
¶4 We grant review but deny relief.