State
v.
Arevalo

ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION ONESep 13, 2018
No. 1 CA-CR 18-0297 PRPC (Ariz. Ct. App. Sep. 13, 2018)

No. 1 CA-CR 18-0297 PRPC

09-13-2018

STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent, v. ARTURO AREVALO, Petitioner.

COUNSEL Maricopa County Attorney's Office, Phoenix By Diane Meloche Counsel for Respondent Arturo Arevalo, 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 UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County
No. CR2003-008555-001
The Honorable Karen L. O'Connor, Judge

REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

COUNSEL

Maricopa County Attorney's Office, Phoenix
By Diane Meloche
Counsel for Respondent

Arturo Arevalo, Kingman
Petitioner

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Presiding Judge Kenton D. Jones, Judge Michael J. Brown, and Judge Jon W. Thompson delivered the decision of the Court.

PER CURIAM:

¶1 Arturo Arevalo seeks review of the superior court's order dismissing his petition for post-conviction relief, filed pursuant to Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.1. This is the petitioner's seventh successive petition since he was re-sentenced in 2007.

¶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, 576-77, ¶ 19 (2012). It is the petitioner's burden to show that the superior court abused its discretion in denying the petition. See State v. Poblete, 227 Ariz. 537, 538, ¶ 1 (App. 2011).

¶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 shown any abuse of discretion.

¶4 Accordingly, we grant review and deny relief.