Jackson v. State

Citation: 566 So. 2d 752

Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama; June 30, 1987; Alabama; State Appellate Court

SummaryOriginalCytator Case TreatmentBackward CitatorAnalysis

EnglishEspañolSimplified EnglishEspañol Fácil

Sylvester Jackson, Jr. was convicted of attempted murder, promoting prison contraband in the first degree, and two counts of second-degree assault, receiving life sentences without parole for the attempted murder count and life sentences for the other charges. The incident occurred on April 12, 1986, at the Escambia County Jail, where Jackson engaged in a disturbance and fought with Deputy Scobie Lynn Wilcoxon, who attempted to control him. During the altercation, Jackson cut Wilcoxon and two other deputies using a weapon fashioned from a razor blade attached to a melted toothbrush. 

Jackson raised several issues on appeal, including the claim of systematic exclusion of black jurors, which was deemed unpreserved for review as it was raised for the first time on appeal. He also contended that there was insufficient evidence to support the attempted murder charge, arguing that the razor blade did not qualify as a deadly weapon under Alabama law and that Wilcoxon's injuries were not life-threatening. The court rejected his argument, affirming that the weapon was indeed designed for inflicting serious injury and that the severity of the victim's wounds was not a requisite for a conviction of attempted murder under Alabama law. The court cited the definition of an attempt and clarified that the possibility of committing the attempted offense does not negate the charge.

Wilcoxon wore a bulletproof flak jacket designed to stop smaller caliber bullets, including 12-gauge shotgun slugs. During an altercation, the appellant inflicted cuts through multiple layers of the vest, resulting in six wounds to Wilcoxon, which could have been fatal without the jacket. The court upheld the appellant's charge as an attempted murder under Alabama law (13A-4-2) and denied his motion for acquittal on this count. The appellant challenged the trial court's decisions regarding counts three and four, related to second-degree assault against Adams and Chandler, arguing there was insufficient evidence of 'serious physical injury' and that the weapon was not deadly or dangerous. The court clarified that under Section 13A-6-21, proving 'serious physical injury' is unnecessary if a deadly weapon is used. The prosecution demonstrated that physical injury occurred, justifying the trial court's decisions. For count five, promoting prison contraband, the appellant argued he possessed nothing illegal. However, Alabama law defines contraband as items prohibited for inmates, and the evidence showed he possessed a deadly weapon useful for escape. The court found his arguments against the conviction for promoting contraband unmeritorious. Lastly, the appellant disputed the admissibility of the razor weapon used in the attack, claiming it was not found on him. The court addressed this objection but found sufficient evidence of his possession.

The prosecution successfully established the relevance of a weapon, identified by witness Adams as a knife made from a razor blade and a toothbrush from the county jail, linking it to the appellant, Sylvester Jackson. The trial court's admission of the weapon into evidence was deemed proper. The appellant's claim that the court erred by refusing certain jury charges was not preserved for appellate review due to lack of objection. Additionally, the appellant argued that the State did not provide adequate notice of prior convictions for sentencing; however, this objection was waived as the appellant's counsel affirmed readiness for sentencing. 

The appellant also contested the introduction of case action summaries as proof of prior convictions under the Habitual Felony Offender Act. While the State claimed this issue was not preserved, the defense's objection on grounds of improper certification was sufficient to preserve it for review. The court found that, according to Alabama law, only minute entries—not case action summaries—are deemed official records for convictions in counties with populations under 500,000, such as Choctaw County. Thus, the use of case action summaries in this context was improper. Despite the waiver of notice defects, the court remanded the case for a new sentencing hearing, requiring the State to prove the appellant's prior felony convictions properly. The convictions were affirmed, but the case was remanded for the specified purpose.