State v. Murphy-Richardson

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UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL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

ISMAEL ANTONIO MURPHY-RICHARDSON, Petitioner.

No. 1 CA-CR 23-0251 PRPC
FILED 05-16-2024

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County
Nos. CR2016-002165-001
CR2016-002960-001
CR2018-102788-001
The Honorable Ronda R. Fisk, Judge

REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

COUNSEL

Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, Phoenix
By Philip D. Garrow
Counsel for Respondent

Ismael Antonio Murphy-Richardson, Florence
Petitioner
 STATE v. MURPHY-RICHARDSON
Decision of the Court

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Presiding Judge Samuel A. Thumma, Judge Jennifer B. Campbell, and
Michael J. Brown delivered the following decision.

PER CURIAM:

¶1 Petitioner Ismael Antonio Murphy-Richardson 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 Murphy-
Richardson’s third and fourth petition.

¶2 Absent an abuse of discretion or legal error, this court will not
disturb a superior court’s ruling on a petition for post-conviction relief. See
State v. Gutierrez, 229 Ariz. 573, 577 ¶ 19 (2012). Petitioner has the burden to
show that the superior court erred in denying the petition for post-
conviction relief. See State v. Poblete, 227 Ariz. 537, 538 ¶ 1 (App. 2011).

¶3 This court has reviewed the record in this matter, the order
denying the petition for post-conviction relief and the petition for review.
This court finds the petitioner has not established error.

¶4 This court grants review but denies relief.

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

2