Opinion
1 CA-CR 23-0340 PRPC
11-28-2023
STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent, v. ANDRES SERRATO GARNICA, Petitioner.
Maricopa County Attorney's Office, Phoenix By Robert A. Walsh Counsel for Respondent Andres Serrato Garnica, Eloy Petitioner
Not for Publication - Rule 111(c), Rules of the Arizona Supreme Court
Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County No. CR2015-155207-001 The Honorable Sam J. Myers, Judge
Maricopa County Attorney's Office, Phoenix By Robert A. Walsh Counsel for Respondent
Andres Serrato Garnica, Eloy Petitioner
Presiding Judge Jennifer B. Campbell, and Judges Kent E. Cattani and Anni Hill Foster delivered the decision of the Court.
MEMORANDUM DECISION
PER CURIAM.
¶1 Petitioner Andres Serrato Garnica seeks review of the superior court's order denying his petition for post-conviction relief. This is petitioner's first 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, the petition for review, and State's response. We find that petitioner has not established an abuse of discretion.
¶4 We grant review but deny relief.