STATE v. WALKER

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOTICE: THIS DECISION DOES NOT CREATE LEGAL PRECEDENT AND MAY NOT BE CITED EXCEPT AS AUTHORIZED BY APPLICABLE RULES. See Ariz. R. Supreme Court 111(c); ARCAP 28(c); Ariz. R. Crim. P. 31.24 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF ARIZONA DIVISION ONE STATE OF ARIZONA, ) ) Respondent, ) ) ) ) ) ) Petitioner. ) ) v. JAMES LEON WALKER, DIVISION ONE FILED: 10/24/2013 RUTH A. WILLINGHAM, CLERK BY: mjt 1 CA-CR 12-0636-PRPC DEPARTMENT E MEMORANDUM DECISION (Not for Publication Rule 111, Rules of the Arizona Supreme Court) Petition for Review from the Superior Court of Maricopa County Cause No. CR2000-012987 The Honorable Eddward C. Ballinger, Judge REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED James Leon Walker Pro Se Florence PER CURIAM ¶1 Petitioner, James Leon Walker, pled guilty to attempted molestation of a child and attempted sexual conduct with a minor in 2001. The trial court sentenced him to fifteen years imprisonment for attempted molestation and placed him on lifetime probation for attempted sexual conduct. Walker now seeks review of the summary dismissal of the latest of his many successive petitions for post-conviction relief. We review the summary dismissal of a petition for post-conviction relief for an abuse of discretion. 793 P.2d 80, 82 State v. Watton, 164 Ariz. 323, 325, (1990). We have jurisdiction pursuant to Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.9(c). ¶2 We raised all deny of conviction relief. the relief proceedings. issues in his Walker in his raised latest earlier and/or could have petition for post- post-conviction relief Any claim a defendant raised or could have raised in an earlier post-conviction relief proceeding is precluded. Ariz. R. Crim. P. 32.2(a). sentence. P.3d This includes the legality of a State v. Shrum, 220 Ariz. 115, 117-20, ¶¶ 3-23, 203 1175, 1177-80 (2009) (sentencing issue regarding the legality of a sentence precluded as untimely even though there was no lawful authority for the sentence imposed). Contrary to Walker s assertions, none of the exceptions under Rule 32.2(b) apply. ¶3 For the above stated reasons, we grant review and deny relief. ________________/S/___________________ LAWRENCE F. WINTHROP, Presiding Judge ________________/S/____________________ MARGARET H. DOWNIE, Judge ________________/S/____________________ JON W. THOMPSON, Judge 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.