State v. Pereyra

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 UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.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. CLEMENTE MARTINEZ PEREYRA, Petitioner. No. 1 CA-CR 19-0267 PRPC FILED 1-9-2020 Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Yavapai County No. P1300CR201700857 The Honorable Tina R. Ainley, Judge REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED COUNSEL Yavapai County Attorney’s Office, Prescott By Sheila Sullivan Polk Counsel for Respondent Clemente Martinez Pereyra, Florence Petitioner MEMORANDUM DECISION Presiding Judge Maria Elena Cruz, Judge Kent E. Cattani and Judge D. Steven Williams delivered the decision of the Court. STATE v. PEREYRA Decision of the Court PER CURIAM: ¶1 Petitioner Clemente Martinez Pereyra 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 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, 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 that 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