State v. Landis

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UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL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

STEVEN RAY LANDIS, Petitioner.

No. 1 CA-CR 24-0225 PRPC
FILED 03-25-2025

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County
No. CR2004-022636-003
The Honorable Michael S. Mandell, Judge

REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

COUNSEL

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

Steven Ray Landis, Buckeye
Petitioner

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Presiding Judge Kent E. Cattani, Judge Samuel A. Thumma, and Judge
Angela K. Paton delivered the following decision.
 STATE v. LANDIS
Decision of the Court

PER CURIAM:

¶1 Petitioner Steven Landis seeks review of the superior court’s
orders denying post-conviction relief in his second and third proceedings
under Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 33.1.

¶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 orders
denying the petition for post-conviction relief and rehearing, and the
petition for review. Both his second and third petition were untimely. And
his claims were precluded by his earlier petition(s) or waived by his guilty
plea. Ariz. R. Crim. P. 33.2(a) (preclusion based on grounds waived by
pleading guilty or on grounds adjudicated on the merits or waived in any
previous post-conviction proceeding). Petitioner has not established error.

¶4 We grant review but deny relief.

MATTHEW J. MARTIN • Clerk of the Court
FILED: JR

2