State v. Jackson

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UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL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

RAMOND CURTIS JACKSON, Petitioner.

No. 1 CA-CR 23-0467 PRPC
FILED 10-03-2024

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County
No. CR2013-002469-001
The Honorable Joseph Kiefer, Judge

REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

COUNSEL

Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, Phoenix
By Johnny Jacquez
Counsel for Respondent

Ramond Curtis Jackson, Florence
Petitioner
 STATE v. JACKSON
Decision of the Court

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Presiding Judge Maria Elena Cruz, Judge Samuel A. Thumma and Judge
Andrew M. Jacobs delivered the following decision.

PER CURIAM:

¶1 Petitioner Ramond Curtis Jackson seeks review of the
superior court’s order denying his petition for post-conviction relief. This
is Jackson’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.
See 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 the petitioner has not established an abuse of
discretion.

¶4 We grant review but deny relief.

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

2