Background
Kimmie Dwayne Baker petitioned for review of a Maricopa County Superior Court order denying post-conviction relief under Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.1. The filing was Baker’s sixth petition for post-conviction relief.
The superior court denied the petition. Baker then sought review in the Arizona Court of Appeals, Division One.
The Court’s Holding
The court granted review but denied relief. It held that Baker had not established that the superior court erred in denying his petition.
Applying the rule that a post-conviction ruling will not be disturbed absent an abuse of discretion or legal error, the court reviewed the record, the superior court’s order, and Baker’s petition for review. It found no established error.
Key Takeaways
- Appellate review was granted, but Baker received no relief.
- A Rule 32 petitioner bears the burden to show error in the superior court’s ruling.
- The court found no abuse of discretion or legal error in denying Baker’s sixth post-conviction petition.
Why It Matters
The decision reiterates the deferential standard governing appellate review of Arizona post-conviction rulings and the petitioner’s burden to demonstrate error. The memorandum decision is not precedential and may be cited only as authorized by Arizona Supreme Court Rule 111(c).