State v. McQuitty

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UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL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

JONATHAN DERRICK MCQUITTY, Petitioner.

No. 1 CA-CR 22-0475 PRPC
FILED 5-11-2023

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Yuma County
No. S1400CR201401045
The Honorable David M. Haws, Judge

REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

COUNSEL

Yuma County Attorney’s Office, Yuma
By Charles Platt
Counsel for Respondent

Cordova Law PLC, Yuma
By Joshua J. Cordova
Counsel for Petitioner
 STATE v. MCQUITTY
Decision of the Court

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Presiding Judge Jennifer M. Perkins, Judge Angela K. Paton, and Judge D.
Steven Williams delivered the decision of the Court.

PER CURIAM:

¶1 Petitioner Jonathan Derrick McQuitty 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 his second
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, petition, and
response. Petitioner has not established an abuse of discretion.

¶4 For the foregoing reasons, we grant review but deny relief.

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

2