State v. Boldt ( 2024 )

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UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL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.
DOUGLAS MAX BOLDT, Petitioner.
No. 1 CA-CR 23-0368 PRPC
FILED 2-6-2024
Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Yavapai County
No. P1300CR20010395
The Honorable Debra R. Phelan, Judge
REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED
COUNSEL
Yavapai County Attorney’s Office, Prescott
By Jason Nunez
Counsel for Respondent
Douglas Max Boldt, Florence
Petitioner
STATE v. BOLDT
Decision of the Court
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Presiding Judge Andrew M. Jacobs, Judge Jennifer M. Perkins, and Judge
David D. Weinzweig delivered the following decision.
PER CURIAM:
¶1 Petitioner Douglas Boldt 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 Boldt’s tenth 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