State v. Jones ( 2022 )

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UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL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.
ARTHUR STANLEY JONES, Petitioner.
No. 1 CA-CR 22-0132 PRPC
FILED 12-13-2022
Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County
No. CR1999-003525
The Honorable Jay R. Adleman, Judge
REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED
COUNSEL
Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, Phoenix
By Krista Wood
Counsel for Respondent
Arthur Stanley Jones, Florence
Petitioner
STATE v. JONES
Decision of the Court
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Presiding Judge Samuel A. Thumma, Judge Cynthia J. Bailey, and Vice
Chief Judge David B. Gass delivered the following decision.
PER CURIAM:
¶1 Petitioner Arthur Stanley Jones 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 Jones’ fourth petition.
¶2 Absent an abuse of discretion or legal error, 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). Petitioner has the burden to
show that the superior court erred in denying the petition for post-
conviction relief. See State v. Poblete, 227 Ariz. 537, 538 ¶ 1 (App. 2011).
¶3 This court has reviewed the record in this matter, the order
denying the petition for post-conviction relief and the petition for review.
This court finds the petitioner has not established error.
¶4 This court grants review but denies relief.
AMY M. WOOD • Clerk of the Court
FILED: AA
2