STATE v. VALDEZ

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 UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.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. DAVID ANTHONY VALDEZ, Petitioner. No. 1 CA-CR 18-0469 PRPC FILED 10-09-2018 Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County No. CR2015-123796-001 The Honorable Michael W. Kemp, Judge REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED COUNSEL Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, Phoenix By Diane Meloche Counsel for Respondent David Anthony Valdez, Kingman Petitioner MEMORANDUM DECISION Presiding Judge Diane M. Johnsen, Judge Maria Elena Cruz, and Judge Randall M. Howe delivered the decision of the Court. STATE v. VALDEZ Decision of the Court PER CURIAM: ¶1 Petitioner David Anthony Valdez 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 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). 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, 538, ¶ 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. Petitioner has not established an abuse of discretion. ¶4 For the foregoing reasons, we grant review but deny relief. AMY M. WOOD • Clerk of the Court FILED: JT 2