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UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.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

No. 1 CA-CR 24-0072 PRPC FILED 03-20-2025

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County No. CR2015-002647-001 The Honorable Mark H. Brain, Judge REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

COUNSEL Grand Canyon Law Group LLC, Mesa By Angela Poliquin Counsel for Petitioner Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, Phoenix By Johnny Jacquez Counsel for Respondent STATE v. KITKO Decision of the Court

MEMORANDUM DECISION Presiding Judge Kent E. Cattani, Judge Samuel A. Thumma, and Judge Angela K. Paton delivered the following decision.

PER CURIAM: ¶1 Petitioner Frank G. Kitko, Jr. seeks review of the superior court’s order denying his petition for post-conviction relief. This is petitioner’s second 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). A petitioner must 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, the superior court’s order denying the petition for post-conviction relief, and the petition for review.

Petitioner has not established an abuse of discretion.

¶4 We grant review but deny relief.

MATTHEW J. MARTIN • Clerk of the Court FILED: JR