Opinion
No. 1 CA-CR 16-0851 PRPC
01-09-2018
STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent, v. PATRICK MICHAEL FERRERO, Petitioner.
COUNSEL Maricopa County Attorney's Office, Phoenix By Diane Meloche Counsel for Respondent Patrick Michael Ferrero, Kingman 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 UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.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. CR2009-103770-001
The Honorable Warren J. Granville, Judge
REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED
COUNSEL
Maricopa County Attorney's Office, Phoenix
By Diane Meloche
Counsel for Respondent
Patrick Michael Ferrero, Kingman
Petitioner
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Presiding Judge Kenton D. Jones, Judge Jon W. Thompson, and Judge Jennifer M. Perkins delivered the decision of the Court.
PER CURIAM:
¶1 Petitioner Patrick Ferrero seeks review of the superior court's order denying his motion to clarify and correct an unlawful sentence, which we treat as a petition for post-conviction relief filed pursuant to Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.1. See Ariz. R. Crim. P. 32.3 (directing the trial court to treat a request for a post-trial remedy as a petition for post-conviction relief). This is the petitioner's first, albeit untimely, 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, 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.