State v. Burgess ( 2023 )

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UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL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.
JEREMIAH MICHAEL BURGESS, Petitioner.
No. 1 CA-CR 22-0105 PRPC
FILED 1-17-2023
Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Mohave County
No. S8015CR201800673
The Honorable Billy K. Sipe Jr., Judge Pro Tempore
REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED
COUNSEL
Mohave County Attorney’s Office, Kingman
By Matthew J. Smith
Counsel for Respondent
Jeremiah Michael Burgess, Eloy
Petitioner
STATE v. BURGESS
Decision of the Court
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Presiding Judge Brian Y. Furuya, Judge Jennifer B. Campbell, and Judge
Paul J. McMurdie delivered the following decision.
PER CURIAM:
¶1 Petitioner Jeremiah Burgess 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 Burgess’ first 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 (2012). It is the 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).
¶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 the petitioner has not established an abuse of discretion.
¶4 We grant review but deny relief.
AMY M. WOOD • Clerk of the Court
FILED: AA
2