Court Opinion

ID: 4562723
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2020-09-03 16:02:24.594789+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:11:38.769973
License: Public Domain

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  UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL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.

                            RICHARD BUSTOS, JR.,
                                 Petitioner.

                          No. 1 CA-CR 20-0123 PRPC
                                FILED 9-3-2020

            Appeal from the Superior Court in Maricopa County
                         No. CR2004-037113-001
              The Honorable Sally Schneider Duncan, Judge

                   REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

                                    COUNSEL

Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, Phoenix
By Andrea L. Kever
Counsel for Respondent

Richard Bustos, Jr., Florence
Petitioner
                             STATE v. BUSTOS
                            Decision of the Court

                       MEMORANDUM DECISION

Presiding Judge David D. Weinzweig delivered the decision of the Court,
in which Judge Jennifer M. Perkins and Judge Samuel A. Thumma joined.

W E I N Z W E I G, Judge:

¶1            Petitioner Richard Bustos, Jr. 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 fourth
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. We find that petitioner has not established an abuse of
discretion.

¶4            We grant review and deny relief.

                           AMY M. WOOD • Clerk of the Court
                           FILED: AA

                                         2