Opinion
No. 1 CA-CR 16-0884 PRPC
11-30-2017
STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent, v. WILLIAM EDWARD MOREHEAD, Petitioner.
COUNSEL Maricopa County Attorney's Office, Phoenix By Diane Meloche Counsel for Respondent William Edward Morehead, Kingman 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 UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.
Appeal from the Superior Court in Maricopa County
Nos. CR1992-090932 and CR1992-091437
The Honorable Joan M. Sinclair, Judge
REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED
COUNSEL
Maricopa County Attorney's Office, Phoenix
By Diane Meloche
Counsel for Respondent
William Edward Morehead, Kingman
Petitioner
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Acting Presiding Judge Peter B. Swann, Judge James B. Morse Jr. and Chief Judge Samuel A. Thumma delivered the decision of the court.
PER CURIAM:
¶1 Petitioner William Edward Morehead 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 Morehead's first petition on the forgery case, and his sixth petition on the sexual offense case.
¶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 the 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, and the petition for review. We find the petitioner has not established an abuse of discretion.
¶4 We grant review but deny relief.