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UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.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

No. 1 CA-CR 24-0324 PRPC FILED 04-15-2025 Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County No. CR2006-009060-001 The Honorable Jeffrey A. Rueter, Judge REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

COUNSEL Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, Phoenix By Johnny Jacquez Counsel for Respondent Barber Law Group PLLC, Phoenix By Bretton H. Barber Counsel for Petitioner STATE v. GARCIA Decision of the Court

MEMORANDUM DECISION Presiding Judge Cynthia J. Bailey, Vice Chief Judge Randall M. Howe, and Judge Andrew M. Jacobs delivered the decision of the court.

PER CURIAM: ¶1 Diego Garcia petitions this Court for review from the dismissal of his third petition for post-conviction relief. We have considered his petition and grant review but deny relief.

¶2 We review the superior court’s ruling on a petition for post- conviction relief for an abuse of discretion, “which occurs if the court makes an error of law or fails to adequately investigate the facts necessary to support its decision.” State v. Bigger, 251 Ariz. 402, 407 ¶ 6 (2021). 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). We will affirm the trial court’s ruling if legally correct for any reason. See State v. Perez, 141 Ariz. 459, 464 (1984).

¶3 We have reviewed the record in this matter, the superior court’s order dismissing 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.

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