State v. Young

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UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL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.

URIAN YOUNG, Petitioner.

No. 1 CA-CR 16-0791 PRPC
FILED 10-19-2017

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County
No. CR94-10928
The Honorable Gregory Como, Judge

REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

COUNSEL

Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, Phoenix
By Diane Meloche
Counsel for Respondent

Urian Young, Yuma
Petitioner

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Presiding Judge Kenton D. Jones, Judge Jon W. Thompson, and Judge
Samuel A. Thumma delivered the decision of the Court.
 STATE v. YOUNG
Decision of the Court

PER CURIAM:

¶1 Petitioner Urian Young 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 the petitioner’s first
successive 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, 576-77, ¶ 19 (2012). It is the petitioner’s
burden to show that the superior court abused its discretion in denying the
petition. See State v. Poblete, 227 Ariz. 537, 538, ¶ 1 (App. 2011).

¶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 shown any abuse of discretion.

¶4 Accordingly, we grant review and deny relief.

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

2