Court Opinion

ID: 9940882
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-15 17:02:56.981426+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:46:03.756185
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 UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL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.

                      VANESSA STAFFORD, Petitioner.

                         No. 1 CA-CR 23-0284 PRPC
                             FILED 2-15-2024

     Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Yavapai County
                         No. V1300CR201880374
                  The Honorable Michael R. Bluff, Judge

                  REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

                                   COUNSEL

Yavapai County Attorney’s Office, Camp Verde
By Ethan A. Wolfinger
Counsel for Respondent

Vanessa Stafford, Peach Springs
Petitioner
                            STATE v. STAFFORD
                            Decision of the Court

                       MEMORANDUM DECISION

Presiding Judge Daniel J. Kiley, Judge Kent E. Cattani, and Judge D. Steven
Williams delivered the decision of the Court.

PER CURIAM:

¶1             Petitioner Vanessa Stafford seeks review of the superior
court’s order denying her petition for post-conviction relief. This is
Petitioner’s fifth successive 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