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UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.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

No. 1 CA-CR 24-0225 PRPC FILED 03-25-2025

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County No. CR2004-022636-003 The Honorable Michael S. Mandell, Judge REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

COUNSEL Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, Phoenix By Philip D. Garrow Counsel for Respondent Steven Ray Landis, Buckeye Petitioner

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

STATE v. LANDIS Decision of the Court PER CURIAM: ¶1 Petitioner Steven Landis seeks review of the superior court’s orders denying post-conviction relief in his second and third proceedings under Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 33.1.

¶2 Absent an abuse of discretion or legal error, this court will not disturb a superior court’s ruling on a petition for post-conviction relief. See State v. Gutierrez, 229 Ariz. 573, 577, ¶ 19 (2012). Petitioner has the burden to show that the superior court erred in denying the petition for post- conviction relief. See State v. Poblete, 227 Ariz. 537, 538, ¶ 1 (App. 2011).

¶3 This court has reviewed the record in this matter, the orders denying the petition for post-conviction relief and rehearing, and the petition for review. Both his second and third petition were untimely. And his claims were precluded by his earlier petition(s) or waived by his guilty plea. Ariz. R. Crim. P. 33.2(a) (preclusion based on grounds waived by pleading guilty or on grounds adjudicated on the merits or waived in any previous post-conviction proceeding). Petitioner has not established error.

¶4 We grant review but deny relief.

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