State v. Boldt
This text of State v. Boldt (State v. Boldt) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Arizona primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
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 UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.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 25-0368 PRPC FILED 04-02-2026
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, Camp Verde By Jason Nunez Counsel for Respondent
Douglas Max Boldt, Florence Petitioner Pro Se STATE v. BOLDT Decision of the Court
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Presiding Judge David B. Gass, Judge Anni Hill Foster, and Chief Judge Randall M. Howe delivered the decision of the Court.
PER CURIAM:
¶1 Douglas Max Boldt petitions this Court for review from the superior court’s summary dismissal of his successive petition for post- conviction relief. We have considered his petition and grant review but deny relief.
¶2 We review the superior court’s ruling on a petition for post- conviction relief for an abuse of discretion, “which occurs if the court makes an error of law or fails to adequately investigate the facts necessary to support its decision.” State v. Bigger, 251 Ariz. 402, 407 ¶ 6 (2021). The petitioner bears the 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). We will affirm the trial court’s ruling if legally correct for any reason. See State v. Perez, 141 Ariz. 459, 464 (1984).
¶3 We have reviewed the record in this matter, the superior court’s order dismissing 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.
MATTHEW J. MARTIN • Clerk of the Court FILED: JR
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
State v. Boldt, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-boldt-arizctapp-2026.