State v. Knox

── State v. Knox ── Court: Court of Appeals of Arizona Date: May 21, 2026 Category: General 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 UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.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. JILL MARIE KNOX, Petitioner. No. 1 CA-CR 25-0378 PRPC FILED 05-21-2026 Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Yavapai County No. V1300CR202080343 The Honorable Michael R. Bluff, Judge REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED COUNSEL Yavapai County Attorney’s Office, Prescott By Glen M. Asay Counsel for Respondent C. Kenneth Ray, II, PC, Prescott By C. Kenneth Ray, II Counsel for Petitioner  STATE v. KNOX Decision of the Court MEMORANDUM DECISION Judge Angela K. Paton delivered the decision of the Court, in which Presiding Judge Michael S. Catlett and Judge Jennifer M. Perkins joined. P A T O N, Judge: ¶1 Petitioner Jill Marie Knox petitions for review from the superior court's order dismissing her petition for post-conviction relief (“PCR”). We grant review but deny relief. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY ¶2 In February 2020, Knox drove her car into another vehicle, causing serious injuries to the other driver and the death of her young daughter. In July 2020, the State charged Knox with manslaughter, aggravated assault, criminal damage, and two counts of aggravated driving or actual physical control while under the influence with a passenger under 15 years of age.1 ¶3 Knox hired private counsel (“Gordon”) in April 2020, who represented her at a preliminary hearing in July 2020. Gordon did not present an expert at the preliminary hearing. He moved to withdraw around the end of the year, which the court granted in early 2021. The court appointed a public defender (“Gundacker”) to represent Knox in April 2021. ¶4 Knox’s trial took place in March 2022. A police officer testified he found prescription bottles, medical marijuana, and marijuana pipes in Knox’s vehicle at the time of the incident, and that Knox told him she had consumed medical marijuana and taken prescription medications —including a muscle relaxer—earlier that day. Other witnesses testified to seeing Knox’s car swerve multiple times—between lanes across the median line into oncoming traffic—before colliding head-on with a vehicle traveling in the opposite direction. ¶5 The State disclosed a toxicology report showing Knox had carisoprodol, meprobamate, and tetrahydrocannabinol (commonly 1 The court granted the State’s motion to dismiss the second count of aggravated driving (count 5) prior to voir dire. 2  STATE v. KNOX Decision of the Court known as THC) in her blood at the time of the collision. At the time the State disclosed the report, the expert did not have access to equipment to test for gabapentin. The expert was later able to test for it, and produced a second toxicology report showing gabapentin was present in Knox’s system at the time of the collision. On the first day of trial, Knox moved to preclude the State from mentioning gabapentin in its case-in-chief. The superior court denied the motion, and Knox did not request a continuance. ¶6 The State presented an expert witness who testified that these specific drugs have depressant-like effects, can impair a person’s ability to drive, and the impact of the drugs when taken together would be “more enhanced than if there was just one of those drugs alone.” Dur