Opinion
No. 1 CA-CR 16-0114 PRPC
10-19-2017
STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent, v. BRANDON MICHAEL FEATHERSTON, Petitioner.
COUNSEL Maricopa County Attorney's Office, Phoenix By Gerald R. Grant Counsel for Respondent Brandon Michael Featherston, Eloy 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 UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.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. CR2012-159493-001
The Honorable Jo Lynn Gentry, Judge
REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED
COUNSEL
Maricopa County Attorney's Office, Phoenix
By Gerald R. Grant
Counsel for Respondent
Brandon Michael Featherston, Eloy
Petitioner
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Presiding Judge Kenton D. Jones, Judge Jon W. Thompson, and Chief Judge Samuel A. Thumma delivered the decision of the Court.
PER CURIAM :
¶1 Petitioner Brandon Featherston 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 the petitioner's first petition for post-conviction relief. His petition for review to this Court was not timely filed. See Ariz. R. Crim. P. 32.9(c).
¶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, 576-77, ¶ 19 (2012). It is the petitioner's burden to show that the superior court abused its discretion in denying the petition. 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 denying the petition for post-conviction relief, and the petition for review. We find that petitioner has not shown any abuse of discretion.
¶4 Accordingly, we grant review and deny relief.