State v. Garcia

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UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL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

DIEGO GARCIA, Petitioner.

No. 1 CA-CR 24-0324 PRPC
FILED 04-15-2025

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County
No. CR2006-009060-001
The Honorable Jeffrey A. Rueter, Judge

REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

COUNSEL

Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, Phoenix
By Johnny Jacquez
Counsel for Respondent

Barber Law Group PLLC, Phoenix
By Bretton H. Barber
Counsel for Petitioner
 STATE v. GARCIA
Decision of the Court

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Presiding Judge Cynthia J. Bailey, Vice Chief Judge Randall M. Howe, and
Judge Andrew M. Jacobs delivered the decision of the court.

PER CURIAM:

¶1 Diego Garcia petitions this Court for review from the
dismissal of his third petition for post-conviction relief. We have considered
his petition and grant review but deny relief.

¶2 We review the superior court’s ruling on a petition for post-
conviction relief for an abuse of discretion, “which occurs if the court makes
an error of law or fails to adequately investigate the facts necessary to
support its decision.” State v. Bigger, 251 Ariz. 402, 407 ¶ 6 (2021). 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). We will affirm the trial court’s ruling if legally correct
for any reason. See State v. Perez, 141 Ariz. 459, 464 (1984).

¶3 We have reviewed the record in this matter, the superior
court’s order dismissing 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.

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

2