Court Opinion

ID: 7838014
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-09-08 15:01:56.200152+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:56:10.683957
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 UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL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.

                  BENJAMIN PAUL ROMERO, Petitioner.

                         No. 1 CA-CR 22-0116 PRPC
                             FILED 9-8-2022

     Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Yavapai County
                         No. V1300CR201980341
                             V1300CR201980418
                             V1300CR201980558
                  The Honorable Michael R. Bluff, Judge

                  REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

                                   COUNSEL

Yavapai County Attorney’s Office, Prescott
By Larissa Parker
Counsel for Respondent

Benjamin Paul Romero, Eloy
Petitioner
                            STATE v. ROMERO
                            Decision of the Court

                       MEMORANDUM DECISION

Presiding Judge Maria Elena Cruz, Judge Angela K. Paton, and Judge Peter
B. Swann delivered the decision of the Court.

PER CURIAM:

¶1             Petitioner Benjamin Paul Romero seeks review of the superior
court’s order denying his petition for post-conviction relief. 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 (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            We grant review and deny relief.

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

                                         2