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UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL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 21-0042 PRPC
FILED 8-5-2021
Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County
No. CR2013-002469-001
The Honorable Timothy J. Ryan, Judge
REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED
COUNSEL
Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, Phoenix
By Amanda M. Parker
Counsel for Respondent
Ramond Curtis Jackson, Florence
Petitioner
STATE v. JACKSON
Decision of the Court
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Presiding Judge Cynthia J. Bailey, Judge Jennifer M. Perkins and Judge
Maria Elena Cruz delivered the decision of the Court.
PER CURIAM:
¶1 Petitioner Ramond Curtis Jackson seeks review of the
superior court’s order denying his petition for post-conviction relief. This
is petitioner’s third successive 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, 278 P.3d 1276, 1280 (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, ¶ 1, 260 P.3d 1102, 1103 (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 that petitioner has not established an abuse of
discretion.
¶4 We grant review and deny relief.
AMY M. WOOD • Clerk of the Court
FILED: AA
2