State v. Mercado
Authorities cited
Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.
- State of Arizona v. Phil Gutierrez 229 Ariz. 573
- 227 Ariz. 537 not in our corpus
- 260 P.3d 1102 not in our corpus
Opinion text
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UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL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.
JOSE F. MERCADO, Petitioner.
No. 1 CA-CR 20-0621 PRPC
FILED 7-29-2021
Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County
No. CR1996-002154
The Honorable Roy C. Whitehead, Judge
REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED
COUNSEL
The Nolan Law Firm, Mesa
By Todd E. Nolan, Vicki A. R. Lopez
Counsel for Petitioner
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Presiding Judge David B. Gass, Judge Michael J. Brown, and Judge David
D. Weinzweig delivered the decision of the Court.
STATE v. MERCADO
Decision of the Court
PER CURIAM:
¶1 Petitioner Jose F. Mercado seeks review of the superior court’s
order denying his petition for post-conviction relief. This is petitioner’s
third 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, 278 P.3d 1276, 1280 (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, ¶ 1, 260 P.3d 1102, 1103 (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, and the petition
for review. We find that petitioner has not established an abuse of
discretion.
¶4 We grant review and deny relief.
AMY M. WOOD • Clerk of the Court
FILED: AA
2