Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Advocates
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Advocates
Judges

STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent, v. DWAYNE THOMAS HORTON, Petitioner.

PER CURIAM

Not for Publication - Rule 111(c), Rules of the Arizona Supreme Court

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County No. CR2016-006103-001 The Honorable Howard D. Sukenic, Judge

Maricopa County Attorney's Office, Phoenix By Amanda M. Parker Counsel for Respondent

Dwayne Thomas Horton, San Luis Petitioner

Presiding Judge Maria Elena Cruz, Judge Samuel A. Thumma, and Judge Michael J. Brown delivered the decision of the Court.

MEMORANDUM DECISION

PER CURIAM

¶1 Petitioner Dwayne Thomas Horton seeks review of the superior court's order denying his petition for post-conviction relief. This is petitioner's 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, 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 that petitioner has not established an abuse of discretion.

¶4 We grant review and deny relief.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

State v. Horton
(May 3, 2022)