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UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL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.
TYRONE DWIGHT TINSON, Petitioner.
No. 1 CA-CR 21-0470 PRPC
FILED 1-20-2022
Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County
No. CR2015-148325-001
The Honorable David J. Palmer, Judge
REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED
COUNSEL
Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, Phoenix
By Amanda M. Parker
Counsel for Respondent
Tyrone Dwight Tinson, San Luis
Petitioner
STATE v. TINSON
Decision of the Court
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Presiding Judge Maria Elena Cruz, Judge Samuel A. Thumma, and Judge
Michael J. Brown delivered the decision of the Court.
PER CURIAM:
¶1 Petitioner Tyrone Dwight Tinson seeks review of the superior
court’s order denying his petition for post-conviction relief. This is
petitioner’s third 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 (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
State v. Tinson
Combined Opinion