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UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.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. OMAR SHAKUR AKRAM, Petitioner.

No. 1 CA-CR 16-0827 PRPC FILED 3-29-2018

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County No. CR2010-006443-001 CR2010-006840-002 The Honorable Pamela Hearn Svoboda, Judge REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

COUNSEL Maricopa County Attorney's Office, Phoenix By Diane Meloche Counsel for Respondent Omar Shakur Akram, Florence Petitioner

MEMORANDUM DECISION Presiding Judge Diane M. Johnsen, Judge Kent E. Cattani and Judge Jennifer M. Perkins delivered the decision of the Court.

STATE v. AKRAM Decision of the Court PER CURIAM: ¶1 Petitioner Omar Shakur Akram seeks review of the superior court's order denying his second and third petitions for post-conviction relief, filed pursuant to Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.1.

¶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 petitions for post-conviction relief, and the petition for review. We find that petitioner has not established an abuse of discretion.

¶4 For the foregoing reasons, we grant review and deny relief.

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