State v. Taylor

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UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL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

CAMERON LEEZELL TAYLOR, Petitioner.

No. 1 CA-CR 23-0534 PRPC
FILED 03-18-2025

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County
No. CR2014-000910-001
The Honorable Michael W. Kemp

REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

COUNSEL

Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, Phoenix
By Philip Daniel Garrow
Counsel for Respondent

Cameron Leezell Taylor, Eloy
Petitioner
 STATE v. TAYLOR
Decision of the Court

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Presiding Judge Jennifer M. Perkins, Judge James B. Morse Jr., and Judge D.
Steven Williams delivered the following decision.

PER CURIAM:

¶1 Petitioner Cameron Taylor 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 Taylor’s second petition.

¶2 We will not disturb a superior court’s ruling on a petition for
post-conviction relief absent an abuse of discretion or legal error. See State
v. Gutierrez, 229 Ariz. 573, 577 ¶ 19 (2012). Taylor has the burden to show
that the superior court erred in denying his petition for post-conviction
relief. See State v. Poblete, 227 Ariz. 537, 538 ¶ 1 (App. 2011).

¶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. Taylor has not established error.

¶4 We grant review but deny relief.

MATTHEW J. MARTIN • Clerk of the Court
FILED: JR

2