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UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.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
*2 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