State v. Lopez

• Court: Court of Appeals of Arizona
• Decided: January 10, 2023
• Docket: 1 CA-CR 22-0288-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• Status: Unpublished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 UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.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.

ROBERTO HERNANDEZ-LOPEZ, Petitioner.

No. 1 CA-CR 22-0288 PRPC FILED 1-10-2023

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County No. CR2012-103865-001 The Honorable Michael C. Blair, Judge

REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

COUNSEL

Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, Phoenix By Krista Wood Counsel for Respondent

Roberto Hernandez-Lopez, Florence Petitioner STATE v. LOPEZ Decision of the Court

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Presiding Judge Maria Elena Cruz, Judge Angela K. Paton, and Judge Peter B. Swann1 delivered the decision of the Court.

PER CURIAM:

¶1 Petitioner Roberto Hernandez-Lopez seeks review of the superior court’s order denying his petition for post-conviction relief. This is petitioner’s third successive 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 relief, and the petition for review. We find that petitioner has not established an abuse of discretion.

1 Judge Peter B. Swann was a sitting member of this court when the matter was assigned to this panel of the court. He retired effective November 28, 2022. In accordance with the authority granted by Article 6, Section 3, of the Arizona Constitution and pursuant to Arizona Revised Statutes (“A.R.S.”) section 12-145, the Chief Justice of the Arizona Supreme Court has designated Judge Swann as a judge pro tempore in the Court of Appeals for the purpose of participating in the resolution of cases assigned to this panel during his term in office and the period during which his vacancy remains open and for the duration of Administrative Order 2022- 162.

2 STATE v. LOPEZ Decision of the Court

¶4 We grant review and deny relief.

AMY M. WOOD • Clerk of the Court FILED: AA