Opinion
No. 1 CA-CR 19-0191 PRPC
11-19-2019
STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent, v. RAYPHE DANIEL NICHOLS, Petitioner.
APPEARANCES Maricopa County Attorney's Office, Phoenix By Frankie Y. Jones Counsel for Respondent Rayphe Daniel Nichols, San Luis 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 UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.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
Nos. CR 2012-150435-001 CR 2015-110851-001
The Honorable Erin Otis, Judge
REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED
APPEARANCES
Maricopa County Attorney's Office, Phoenix
By Frankie Y. Jones
Counsel for Respondent
Rayphe Daniel Nichols, San Luis
Petitioner
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Presiding Judge Jennifer B. Campbell delivered the decision of the Court, in which Judges Lawrence F. Winthrop and Michael J. Brown joined.
PER CURIAM:
¶1 Petitioner Rayphe Daniel Nichols 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 petitioner's first petition for review.
¶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.