State v. Witzig ( 2020 )

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UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL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.
DREW MICHAEL WITZIG, Petitioner
No. 1 CA-CR 19-0481 PRPC
FILED 9-17-2020
Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Mohave County
No. S8015CR201600090
The Honorable Billy K. Sipe, Judge Pro Tempore
REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED
COUNSEL
Mohave County Attorney’s Office, Kingman
By Matthew J. Smith
Counsel for Respondent
Drew Michael Witzig, Eloy
Petitioner
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Presiding Judge Jennifer M. Perkins, Judge David B. Gass, and Judge
Michael J. Brown delivered the decision of the Court.
STATE v. WTZIG
Decision of the Court
PER CURIAM:
¶1 Petitioner Drew Michael Witzig 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 petitioner's second
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. 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