Opinion
No. 1 CA-CR 19-0118 PRPC
11-19-2019
STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent, v. ARTHUR ANTONIO OCHOA, Petitioner.
APPEARANCES Maricopa County Attorney's Office, Phoenix By Andrea L. Kever Counsel for Respondent Arthur Antonio Ochoa , Florence 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 UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.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. CR 1999-092982
The Honorable Christine E. Mulleneaux, Judge Pro Tem
REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED
APPEARANCES
Maricopa County Attorney's Office, Phoenix
By Andrea L. Kever
Counsel for Respondent
Arthur Antonio Ochoa , Florence
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 Arthur Antonio Ochoa 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 fourth petition for review. The court has also considered petitioner's supplemental argument filed November 1, 2019.
¶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.