Case Information
*1 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 UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.
IN THE
A RIZONA C OURT OF A PPEALS
D IVISION O NE
STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent , v.
FRANK G. KITKO, JR., Petitioner . No. 1 CA-CR 24-0072 PRPC FILED 03-20-2025 Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County No. CR2015-002647-001 The Honorable Mark H. Brain, Judge REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED COUNSEL
Grand Canyon Law Group LLC, Mesa
By Angela Poliquin
Counsel for Petitioner
Maricopa County Attorney’s Office , Phoenix
By Johnny Jacquez
Counsel for Respondent
STATE v. KITKO Decision of the Court MEMORANDUM DECISION Presiding Judge Kent E. Cattani, Judge Samuel A. Thumma, and Judge Angela K. Paton delivered the following decision.
PER CURIAM:
¶1 Petitioner Frank G. Kitko, Jr. seeks review of the superior court’s order denying his petition for post-conviction relief. This is petitioner’s second 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). A petitioner must 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, the superior court’s order denying the petition for post-conviction relief, and the petition for review. Petitioner has not established an abuse of discretion.
¶4 We grant review but deny relief.
2