Opinion
1 CA-CR 21-0211 PRPC
12-23-2021
STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent, v. BYRON TRENELL HAMPHILL WOOTEN, Petitioner.
Maricopa County Attorney's Office, Phoenix By Robert E. Prather Counsel for Respondent Garcia Law PLLC, Phoenix By Stephen S. Garcia Counsel for Petitioner
Not for Publication - Rule 111(c), Rules of the Arizona Supreme Court
Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County No. CR2016-119929-001 The Honorable Danielle J. Viola, Judge
Maricopa County Attorney's Office, Phoenix By Robert E. Prather Counsel for Respondent
Garcia Law PLLC, Phoenix By Stephen S. Garcia Counsel for Petitioner
Presiding Judge Randall M. Howe, Judge Brian Y. Furuya, and Judge Michael J. Brown delivered the decision of the court.
MEMORANDUM DECISION
PER CURIAM.
¶1 Petitioner Byron Trenell Hamphill Wooten seeks review of the superior court's order denying his petition for post-conviction relief, filed pursuant to Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.1. This is petitioner'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 (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, the petition for review, and the response. We find that petitioner has not established an abuse of discretion.
¶4 For the foregoing reasons, we grant review and deny relief.