State v. Ogle

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UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.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

JESSIE PAUL OGLE, Petitioner.

No. 1 CA-CR 20-0507 PRPC FILED 5-11-2021

Appeal from the Superior Court in Maricopa County No. CR2014-150017-001

The Honorable Bradley H. Astrowsky, Judge REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

COUNSEL

Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, Phoenix

By Amanda M. Parker

Counsel for Respondent

The Nolan Law Firm, PLLC, Mesa

By Todd E. Nolan

Counsel for Appellant STATE v. OGLE

Decision of the Court

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Presiding Judge Kent E. Cattani, Judge Samuel A. Thumma, and Judge Brian Y. Furuya delivered the decision of the Court.

PER CURIAM:

¶1 Petitioner Jessie Paul Ogle seeks review of the superior court’s order denying his petition for post-conviction relief. This is Ogle’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, 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