State v. Tracey

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UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.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

STEVEN EUGENE TRACEY, Petitioner.

No. 1 CA-CR 20-0446 PRPC

FILED 4-6-2021

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Yavapai County No. P1300CR201400619

The Honorable Michael R. Bluff, Judge REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

COUNSEL

Yavapai County Attorney’s Office, Prescott

By Sheila Sullivan Polk

Counsel for Respondent

Steven Eugene Tracey, Florence

Petitioner STATE v. TRACEY

Decision of the Court

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Presiding Judge Paul J. McMurdie, Judge Cynthia J. Bailey, and Judge Lawrence F. Winthrop delivered the following decision.

PER CURIAM:

¶1 Petitioner Steven Eugene Tracey 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 the 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 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