Opinion
No. 1 CA-CR 14-0766 PRPC
12-06-2016
STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent, v. ERIC SHAW GIBSON, Petitioner.
COUNSEL Maricopa County Attorney's Office, Phoenix By Lisa Marie Martin Counsel for Respondent Eric Shaw Gibson, Florence 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 UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.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. CR2010-048032-001
The Honorable Sherry K. Stephens, Judge
REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED
COUNSEL
Maricopa County Attorney's Office, Phoenix
By Lisa Marie Martin
Counsel for Respondent
Eric Shaw Gibson, Florence
Petitioner
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Presiding Judge Diane M. Johnsen, Judge Jon W. Thompson and Judge Paul J. McMurdie issued the decision of the court.
PER CURIAM:
¶1 Eric Shaw Gibson petitions for review of the summary dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief. We have considered the petition for review and, for the reasons stated, grant review but deny relief.
¶2 Following a jury trial, Gibson was convicted of two counts of robbery and sentenced to concurrent 11-year prison terms. This court affirmed the convictions and sentences on appeal. State v. Gibson, 1 CA-CR 11-0489, 2013 WL 440637 (Ariz. App. Feb. 5, 2013) (mem. decision).
¶3 Gibson commenced a timely proceeding for post-conviction relief and filed a pro se petition, in which he asserted claims of ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel. In summarily dismissing the petition, the superior court issued a ruling that clearly identified, fully addressed, and correctly resolved the claims. Under these circumstances, we need not repeat that court's analysis here; instead, we adopt it. See State v. Whipple, 177 Ariz. 272, 274 (App. 1993) (when superior court rules "in a fashion that will allow any court in the future to understand the resolution[,] [n]o useful purpose would be served by this court rehashing the trial court's correct ruling in [the] written decision").
¶4 Accordingly, although we grant review, we deny relief.