State v. MacIel

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UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL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

GERARDO O MACIEL, Petitioner.

No. 1 CA-CR 23-0442 PRPC
FILED 3-21-2024

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County
No CR2008-006720-001
CR2005-008699-001
CR2008-006732-001
CR2008-007291-001
CR2008-007386-001
CR2007-007409-001
The Honorable Michael W. Kemp, Judge

REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

COUNSEL

Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, Phoenix
By Julie A. Done, Jessi Wade
Counsel for Respondent

The Stavris Law Firm, PLLC, Scottsdale
By Christopher Stavris
Counsel for Petitioner
 STATE v. MACIEL
Decision of the Court

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Presiding Judge Anni Hill Foster, Judge Brian Y. Furuya, and Vice Chief
Judge Randall M. Howe delivered the decision of the Court.

PER CURIAM:

¶1 Petitioner Gerardo O Maciel seeks review of the superior
court’s order denying his petition for post-conviction relief. This is
Petitioner’s third 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, 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