Opinion
1 CA-CR 23-0321 PRPC
07-16-2024
STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent, v. KURT BRAXTON WILLIAMS, Petitioner.
Maricopa County Attorney's Office, Phoenix By Philip Garrow Counsel for Respondent. Kurt Braxton Williams, Buckeye Petitioner.
Not for Publication - Rule 111(c), Rules of the Arizona Supreme Court
Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County No. CR 1997-014978 The Honorable Mark H. Brain, Judge.
Maricopa County Attorney's Office, Phoenix By Philip Garrow Counsel for Respondent.
Kurt Braxton Williams, Buckeye Petitioner.
Presiding Judge Andrew M. Jacobs, Judge Jennifer M. Perkins, and Judge David D. Weinzweig delivered the decision of the Court.
MEMORANDUM DECISION
PER CURIAM.
¶1 Petitioner Kurt Williams seeks review of the superior court's order denying his petition for post-conviction relief. This is the petitioner's seventh 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, 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, 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 that the petitioner has not established an abuse of discretion.
¶4 We grant review but deny relief.