Jackson v. State, 375 Ark. 321

290 S.W.3d 574 (2009) · Supreme Court of Arkansas · January 8, 2009 · No. CR 07-1016

Summary

The Supreme Court of Arkansas affirmed Stanley D. Jackson’s capital-murder conviction and life sentence for the shooting death of Herman Cobb, Jr. The court rejected challenges to the sufficiency of the evidence, voir dire procedures, Batson rulings, and alleged ineffective assistance of counsel during voir dire, primarily on grounds of sufficient evidence, mootness, or lack of preservation.

Court
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Writing for the Court
Elana Cunningham Wills
Jurisdiction
Arkansas
Decision date
January 8, 2009
Docket number
CR 07-1016
Procedural posture
Direct appeal from a capital-murder conviction and life sentence entered after a Desha County jury trial.
Standard of review
A directed-verdict motion is reviewed as a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the State and affirming if substantial evidence supports the verdict. Voir dire and evidentiary rulings are reviewed for abuse of discretion. A Batson ruling is reviewed for clear error or whether it was clearly against the preponderance of the evidence. Refusal to give a lesser-included-offense instruction is reviewed for abuse of discretion, and the instruction is required only when there is a rational basis supported by evidence. Preserved claims of ineffective assistance are governed by Strickland v. Washington.
Precedential value
Published Arkansas Supreme Court opinion; precedential.
Parties
Stanley D. Jackson v. State of Arkansas
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

criminal procedurejury selectionineffective assistanceevidenceappellate procedure

Practice areas

criminal lawcriminal procedureappellate practiceevidenceconstitutional law

Questions Presented

  1. Whether substantial evidence supported Jackson's capital-murder conviction and established premeditation and deliberation.
  2. Whether the circuit court committed reversible error in conducting preliminary jury orientation while Jackson was absent, failing to continue the trial after jurors failed to appear, and handling the death-qualification and voir dire process.
  3. Whether the State's peremptory strikes violated Batson v. Kentucky.
  4. Whether defense counsel's alleged sleeping during voir dire rendered counsel ineffective or required a mistrial.
  5. Whether the circuit court improperly admonished the jury regarding an unsupported inference that Jackson's brother shot Cobb or excluded testimony concerning Jackson's relationship with his brother.
  6. Whether Jackson was entitled to a jury instruction on extreme-emotional-disturbance manslaughter.
  7. Whether the jury was properly permitted to take the admitted medical examiner's report into the jury room during deliberations.

Holdings

  1. Substantial evidence supported the capital-murder conviction because the evidence showed that Jackson fired the fatal shot after an interval following the thigh shot, supporting an inference of premeditation and deliberation.
  2. The court would not address Jackson's fair-cross-section challenge because it was not timely raised, and his challenge to proceeding during his absence was unpreserved because the mistrial motion was not made at the first opportunity.
  3. Jackson's challenge to death-qualification was moot because he received a life sentence, and the circuit court did not err in rejecting his Batson challenges where the State gave race-neutral reasons and struck all jurors who gave the same death-penalty response.
  4. Jackson was not entitled to relief based on counsel's alleged sleeping during voir dire because he had three other attorneys actively participating and was never without the assistance of counsel.
  5. The circuit court did not abuse its discretion by admonishing the jury not to infer that Jackson's brother shot Cobb or by excluding testimony about Jackson's close relationship with his brother during the guilt phase.
  6. The circuit court properly refused to instruct the jury on extreme-emotional-disturbance manslaughter because no rational basis supported the instruction.
  7. The circuit court did not err in allowing the jury to take the medical examiner's report into the jury room because the report had been admitted into evidence while Jackson was present and represented by counsel.

Key quotations

Thus, to qualify for the manslaughter instruction, there must be evidence of a provocation resulting in an extreme emotional disturbance. (590)
Although the report may have contained some details about which Dr. Peretti did not testify, this would merely have constituted cause to move for redaction of portions of the exhibit, which Jackson did not do. (591)

Factual background

During an early-morning fight between Herman Cobb, Jr., and Jackson's brother at a Dumas restaurant, Jackson entered carrying a gun and fired three shots. The first shot struck a light fixture, the second struck Cobb in the thigh, and the third struck Cobb in the head after an interval of approximately one or two minutes despite requests that Jackson not shoot. Multiple witnesses identified Jackson as the only person with a gun, and medical testimony indicated that the fatal head wound could not have resulted from the described struggle over the firearm. Jackson gave statements asserting self-defense and lack of intent, but later admitted that he killed Cobb.

Procedural history

Jackson was charged with capital murder after the shooting death of Herman Cobb, Jr. A Desha County jury convicted him of capital murder in March 2007 and sentenced him to life imprisonment. The Supreme Court of Arkansas reviewed Jackson's six appellate points, including sufficiency of the evidence, voir dire and Batson claims, ineffective assistance during voir dire, evidentiary rulings, refusal to instruct on manslaughter, and submission of the medical examiner's report to the jury, and affirmed.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…