State v. Barnett ( 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UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL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.
DERRICK SHAWN BARNETT, Petitioner.
No. 1 CA-CR 23-0125 PRPC
FILED 12-12-2023
Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Coconino County
No. S0300CR201700678
The Honorable Dan R. Slayton, Judge
REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED
COUNSEL
Coconino County Attorney’s Office, Flagstaff
By James M. Mapp
Counsel for Respondent
Derrick Shawn Barnett, Winslow
Petitioner
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Presiding Judge James B. Morse Jr., Judge Cynthia J. Bailey, and Judge
Anni Hill Foster delivered the decision of the Court.
STATE v. BARNETT
Decision of the Court
PER CURIAM:
¶1 Petitioner Derrick Shawn Barnett 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 his 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 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, petition for review,
response, and reply. Petitioner has not established an abuse of discretion.
¶4 For the foregoing reasons, we grant review but deny relief.
AMY M. WOOD • Clerk of the Court
FILED: AA
2