Opinion
No. 1 CA-CR 18-0071 PRPC
06-14-2018
STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent, v. SUNIL CHANDRA KATIAL, Petitioner.
COUNSEL Law Offices of Robert J. McWhirter By Robert J. McWhirter Counsel for Petitioner Maricopa County Attorney's Office, Phoenix By Diane Meloche Counsel for Respondent
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 UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.
Appeal from the Superior Court in Maricopa County
No. CR2012-048184-001
The Honorable John R. Ditsworth, Judge
REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED
COUNSEL
Law Offices of Robert J. McWhirter
By Robert J. McWhirter
Counsel for Petitioner
Maricopa County Attorney's Office, Phoenix
By Diane Meloche
Counsel for Respondent
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Presiding Judge Jon W. Thompson, Judge Peter B. Swann, and Judge James P. Beene delivered the decision of the Court.
PER CURIUM:
¶1 Petitioner Sunil Chandra Katial 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 third successive 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 an abuse of discretion.
¶4 Accordingly, we grant review and deny relief.