Opinion
No. 1 CA-CR 16-0176 PRPC
11-07-2017
STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent, v. PETER JAMES LITTLE, Petitioner.
COUNSEL Maricopa County Attorney's Office, Phoenix By Susan L. Luder Counsel for Respondent Peter James Little, Tucson 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 UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.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. CR2001-005401
The Honorable Mark H. Brain, Judge
REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED
COUNSEL
Maricopa County Attorney's Office, Phoenix
By Susan L. Luder
Counsel for Respondent
Peter James Little, Tucson
Petitioner
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Presiding Judge Michael J. Brown, Judge Jennifer B. Campbell and Chief Judge Samuel A. Thumma delivered the decision of the Court.
PER CURIAM:
¶1 Petitioner Peter James Little seeks review of the superior court's order denying his petitions for post-conviction relief, filed pursuant to Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.1. These are petitioner's fifth and sixth successive petitions.
¶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, ¶ 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 petitions for post-conviction relief, and the petition for review. We find that petitioner has not established an abuse of discretion.
¶4 For the foregoing reasons, we grant review and deny relief.