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UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.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

No. 1 CA-CR 24-0025 PRPC FILED 12-12-2024 AMENDED PER ORDER FILED 12-12-2024 Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County No. CR 2017-127900-001 The Honorable Jay R. Adleman, Judge REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

COUNSEL Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, Phoenix By Philip D. Garrow Counsel for Respondent Martice Deshawn Wallace, Eloy Petitioner STATE v. WALLACE Decision of the Court

MEMORANDUM DECISION Presiding Judge Michael S. Catlett, Judge Jennifer M. Perkins, and Vice Chief Judge Randall M. Howe delivered the decision of the Court.

PER CURIAM: ¶1 Petitioner Martice Deshawn Wallace seeks review of the superior court’s order denying his petition for post-conviction relief. This is petitioner’s fourth 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 and deny relief.

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