Opinion
1 CA-CR 22-0013 PRPC
07-28-2022
STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent, v. ADAN TAVISON JIMENEZ, Petitioner.
Maricopa County Attorney's Office, Phoenix By Krista Wood Counsel for Respondent Adan Tavison Jimenez, Florence Petitioner
Not for Publication - Rule 111(c), Rules of the Arizona Supreme Court
Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County No. CR2000-019168 The Honorable Ronee Korbin Steiner, Judge
Maricopa County Attorney's Office, Phoenix By Krista Wood Counsel for Respondent
Adan Tavison Jimenez, Florence Petitioner
Judge David D. Weinzweig, Judge Brian Y. Furuya and Judge Jennifer M. Perkins delivered the decision of the Court.
MEMORANDUM DECISION
PER CURIAM
¶1 Petitioner Jimenez seeks review of the superior court's order denying his petition for post-conviction relief. This is petitioner's tenth 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, 278 P.3d 1276, 1280 (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, ¶ 1, 260 P.3d 1102, 1103 (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 that petitioner has not established an abuse of discretion.
¶4 We grant review and deny relief.