Court Opinion

ID: 9363797
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-01-17 18:02:18.651198+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:15:34.343618
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  UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL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.

                        JEFFERY FULCHER, Petitioner.

                          No. 1 CA-CR 22-0336 PRPC
                               FILED 1-17-2023

     Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County
                          No. CR2013-445008-001
                  The Honorable Margaret LaBianca, Judge

                   REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

                                    COUNSEL

Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, Phoenix
By Krista Wood
Counsel for Respondent

Jeffery Fulcher, Florence
Petitioner
                             STATE v. FULCHER
                             Decision of the Court

                       MEMORANDUM DECISION

Presiding Judge Brian Y. Furuya, Judge Jennifer B. Campbell, and Judge
Paul J. McMurdie delivered the following decision.

PER CURIAM:

¶1          Petitioner Jeffery Fulcher 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 Fulcher’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 the 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. We find the petitioner has not established an abuse of discretion.

¶4            We grant review but deny relief.

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

                                          2