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 UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.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