State v. Valentine

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UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL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

LEONARD JOSEPH VALENTINE, Petitioner.

No. 1 CA-CR 24-0553 PRPC
FILED 05-15-2025

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County

No. CR2012-006283-001
The Honorable Bruce R. Cohen, Judge

REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

COUNSEL

Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, Phoenix
By Faith Cheree Klepper
Counsel for Respondent

Leonard Joseph Valentine, Buckeye
Petitioner Pro Se
 STATE v. VALENTINE
Decision of the Court

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Presiding Judge Anni Hill Foster, Judge Michael J. Brown, and Judge Paul
J. McMurdie delivered the following decision.

PER CURIAM:

¶1 Petitioner Leonard Joseph Valentine seeks review of the
superior court’s order denying his petition for post-conviction relief. This is
Valentine’s 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, 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, response, and reply. 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