State v. De La Cruz

• Court: Court of Appeals of Arizona
• Decided: March 24, 2026
• Docket: 1 CA-CR 25-0464 PRPC
• Status: Unpublished

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 UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.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.

JUAN FRANCISCO DE LA CRUZ, Petitioner.

No. 1 CA-CR 25-0464 PRPC FILED 03-24-2026

Appeal from the Superior Court in Maricopa County No. CR2019-102167-001, CR2020-136273-001 The Honorable Michael W. Kemp, Judge, Retired The Honorable Aryeh D. Schwartz

REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

COUNSEL

Juan Francisco De La Cruz, Kingman Petitioner

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Presiding Judge Samuel A. Thumma, Judge Andrew J. Becke, and Judge Kent E. Cattani delivered the decision of the Court. STATE v. DE LA CRUZ Decision of the Court

PER CURIAM:

¶1 Petitioner Juan Francisco De La Cruz seeks review of the superior court’s order denying his petition for post-conviction relief. This is petitioner’s second petition in both CR2019-102167 and CR2020-136273.

¶2 Absent an abuse of discretion or error of law, we 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) (noting that the petitioner has the 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 relief, and the petition for review. We find that the petitioner has not established an abuse of discretion.

¶4 We grant review but deny relief.

MATTHEW J. MARTIN • Clerk of the Court FILED: JR