State v. Manning

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UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL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.

RONALD LEE MANNING, Petitioner.

No. 1 CA-CR 23-0161 PRPC
FILED 11-28-2023

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Mohave County
No. S8015CR2000598
The Honorable Douglas Camacho, Judge Pro Tem

REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

COUNSEL

Mohave County Attorney’s Office, Kingman
By Amanda Claerhout
Counsel for Respondent

Ronald Lee Manning, Florence
Petitioner
 STATE v. MANNING
Decision of the Court

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Presiding Judge Jennifer B. Campbell, and Judges Kent E. Cattani and Anni
Hill Foster delivered the decision of the Court.

PER CURIAM:

¶1 Petitioner Ronald Lee Manning seeks review of the superior
court’s order denying his petition for post-conviction relief. This is
petitioner’s fourth 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, the petition for
review, State’s response, and Petitioner’s reply. We find that petitioner has
not established an abuse of discretion.

¶4 We grant review but deny relief.

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

2