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 UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.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.
DEMETRIUS WHITE, Petitioner . No. 1 CA-CR 17-0007 PRPC FILED 12-4-2017 Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County No. CR1999-017627
The Honorable David O. Cunanan, Judge REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED COUNSEL
Maricopa County Attorney's Office, Phoenix
By Diane Meloche
Counsel for Respondent
Demetrius White, Florence
Petitioner
MEMORANDUM DECISION Presiding Judge Lawrence F. Winthrop, Judge Diane M. Johnsen and Judge Maria Elena Cruz delivered the decision of the Court.
*2 STATE v. WHITE Decision of the Court
PER CURIAM :
¶1 Petitioner Demetrius White 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 latest successive 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, ¶ 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 petitioner has not established an abuse of discretion.
¶4 For the foregoing reasons, we grant review and deny relief.
2