STATE v. BERRY

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
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 UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.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 ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION ONE STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent, v. THOMAS JOSEPH BERRY, Petitioner. No. 1 CA-CR 22-0109 PRPC FILED 12-15-2022 Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County No. CR2016-148001-001 The Honorable Ronda R. Fisk, Judge REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED COUNSEL Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, Phoenix By Krista Wood Counsel for Respondent Law Office of Stephen M. Johnson, Inc., Phoenix By Stephen M. Johnson Counsel for Petitioner STATE v. BERRY Decision of the Court MEMORANDUM DECISION Presiding Judge David D. Weinzweig, Judge Randall M. Howe, and Judge D. Steven Williams delivered the decision of the court. PER CURIUM: ¶1 Petitioner Thomas Joseph Berry 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 first 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, 278 P.3d 1276, 1280 (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, 260 P.3d 1102, 1103 (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. The petitioner has failed to show an abuse of discretion. ¶4 relief. For the foregoing reasons, this court grants review but denies AMY M. WOOD • Clerk of the Court FILED: AA 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.