Opinion
No. 1 CA-CR 20-0143 PRPC
06-30-2020
STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent, v. RALPH FRANK ESPOSITO, JR., Petitioner.
COUNSEL Maricopa County Attorney's Office, Phoenix By Andrea L. Kever Counsel for Respondent Ralph F. Esposito Jr., Tucson 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 UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.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. CR2014-001312-001
The Honorable Peter A. Thompson, Judge
REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED
COUNSEL Maricopa County Attorney's Office, Phoenix
By Andrea L. Kever
Counsel for Respondent Ralph F. Esposito Jr., Tucson
Petitioner
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Presiding Judge Paul J. McMurdie, Judge Jennifer B. Campbell, and Vice Chief Judge Kent E. Cattani delivered the following decision. PER CURIAM:
¶1 Petitioner Ralph F. Esposito, Jr. 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 Esposito'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 the 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.
We also deny Esposito's motion, dated June 15, 2020, to compel production of materials created by a former attorney and to depose another former attorney. --------