Esaw Jackson v. State of Alabama

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Rel: 12/18/2009 Notice: T h i s o p i n i o n i s s u b j e c t t o f o r m a l r e v i s i o n b e f o r e p u b l i c a t i o n i n t h e advance s h e e t s o f Southern R e p o r t e r . R e a d e r s a r e r e q u e s t e d t o n o t i f y t h e Reporter o f Decisions, A l a b a m a A p p e l l a t e C o u r t s , 300 D e x t e r A v e n u e , M o n t g o m e r y , A l a b a m a 3 6 1 0 4 - 3 7 4 1 ((334) 2 2 9 - 0 6 4 9 ) , o f a n y t y p o g r a p h i c a l o r o t h e r e r r o r s , i n o r d e r t h a t c o r r e c t i o n s may b e made b e f o r e t h e o p i n i o n i s p r i n t e d i n Southern R e p o r t e r . ALABAMA COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OCTOBER TERM, 2009-2010 CR-06-1398 Esaw Jackson v. State o f Alabama Appeal from J e f f e r s o n C i r c u i t Court (CC-06-2138; CC-06-2139; CC-06-2140; CC-06-2141) MAIN, Judge. 1 T h i s c a s e was o r i g i n a l l y a s s i g n e d t o a n o t h e r j u d g e on t h i s C o u r t ; i t was r e a s s i g n e d t o Judge M a i n on May 15, 2009. A l t h o u g h he was n o t a member o f t h e C o u r t on June 24, 2008, when o r a l a r g u m e n t s were c o n d u c t e d , he h a s r e v i e w e d t h e t a p e of o r a l arguments. 1 CR-06-1398 Esaw murder Jackson was for killing convicted of three counts of P a m e l a Montgomery a n d M i l t o n capital Poole I I I . J a c k s o n was c o n v i c t e d o f c a p i t a l m u r d e r f o r k i l l i n g Montgomery by shooting her with a r i f l e fired f r o m a v e h i c l e , § 13A-5- 4 0 ( a ) ( 1 8 ) , A l a . Code 1975; c a p i t a l m u r d e r f o r k i l l i n g P o o l e b y shooting him w i t h a rifle fired from a vehicle, § 13A-5- 4 0 ( a ) ( 1 8 ) , A l a . Code 1975; a n d o f c a p i t a l m u r d e r f o r k i l l i n g Montgomery a n d P o o l e d u r i n g one a c t o r p u r s u a n t t o one scheme or course of conduct, § 13A-5-40(a)(10), A l a . Code 1975. J a c k s o n was a l s o c o n v i c t e d o f two c o u n t s o f a t t e m p t e d m u r d e r , see §§ 13A-4-2 Denarius and 13A-6-2, A l a . Code Montgomery a n d S h a n i e c e presentation the j u r y of evidence 1975, Montgomery. f o r shooting F o l l o w i n g the a t t h e p e n a l t y phase o f t h e t r i a l , recommended, b y a v o t e o f 10 t o 2, t h a t sentenced t o death. The circuit court J a c k s o n be conducted a final s e n t e n c i n g h e a r i n g on M a r c h 16, 2007, a n d s e n t e n c e d J a c k s o n t o death f o r h i s capital-murder convictions. The t r i a l also sentenced terms Jackson imprisonment for Jackson a motion filed operation of law the on to two consecutive attempted-murder of court life convictions. f o r a new t r i a l , w h i c h was d e n i e d b y May 15, 2 2007. See Rule 24.4, CR-06-1398 Ala.R.Crim.P. defendant This has § 13A-5-53(a), The 1, and been appeal, which is sentenced to death, A l a . Code 1 9 7 5 . Shaniece III. She stated on t h e i r that housing p r o j e c t i n which moved t o S m i t h f i e l d . she See February M i l t o n P o o l e I I I were she automobile. lived i n Ensley u n t i l at which to Loretta, have r e q u i r e d M i l t o n t o change s c h o o l s , 3 the mother of M i l t o n l i v e d closed, According killed Montgomery were i n j u r e d L o r e t t a P o o l e t e s t i f i e d t h a t she was Poole a followed. i n d i c a t e d t h a t on Montgomery and D e n a r i u s when a gunman o p e n e d f i r e when 2 evidence adduced a t t r i a l 2006, P a m e l a Montgomery and automatic the time she t h e move w o u l d so t h e y d e c i d e d that he w o u l d s t a y w i t h t h e Montgomery f a m i l y so he c o u l d r e m a i n student at Ensley High School. L o r e t t a t e s t i f i e d t h a t she P a m e l a Montgomery were c l o s e f r i e n d s , and t h a t P a m e l a Milton to Loretta's house every evening so he could a and brought get a Jackson a l s o f i l e d a w r i t t e n n o t i c e of appeal w i t h regard t o each of h i s c o n v i c t i o n s , i n c l u d i n g the attempted-murder convictions. 2 A number o f w i t n e s s e s r e f e r r e d t o M i l t o n P o o l e I I I as "Three." For purposes of t h i s o p i n i o n , t h i s Court w i l l r e f e r t o h i m as " M i l t o n . " 3 3 CR-06-1398 change o f c l o t h e s before and t h e y could spend some t i m e t a k i n g h i m b a c k t o t h e Montgomery Loretta further t e s t i f i e d together, residence. she was f a m i l i a r w i t h Jackson, whom she r e f e r r e d t o as " W o l f , " f r o m l i v i n g i n t h e a r e a . testified that a p p r o x i m a t e l y two weeks b e f o r e shooting, she a n d a g r o u p o f p e o p l e were p l a y i n g She s t a t e d t h a t J a c k s o n was o u t s i d e h e r h o u s e a n d g o t i n t o an argument with one believed that person telephone. of the people According was cards the She a t h e r house. a t h e r house repeatedly calling t o L o r e t t a , she t o l d because his he cellular h i m nobody i n h e r h o u s e was c a l l i n g h i m . L o r e t t a t e s t i f i e d t h a t a p p r o x i m a t e l y one week a f t e r t h a t confrontation, she was walking to the store with another p e r s o n when t h e y e n c o u n t e r e d J a c k s o n a n d J a c k s o n s p o k e t o h e r friend. Loretta stated: "And h i m a n d h e r made c o n v e r s a t i o n , a n d we were s t i l l walking along. So t h e y s t o p p e d t a l k i n g , s o I l o o k e d o v e r a t h i m , a n d I s a i d -- I s a y , 'Esaw,' I s a i d , 'why you r o l l i n g y o u r e y e s a n d a c t i n g l i k e t h a t t o w a r d me.' I s a i d , 'what I done t o y o u ? ' He s a i d , 'You a i n ' t d i d a damn t h i n g t o me.' I said, 'Well, what's t h e problem, then?' I s a i d -- he s a i d , 'You know what, I a i n ' t g o t no p r o b l e m w i t h you; n o t f o r r e a l . I j u s t don't l i k e your ass.' I s a i d , 'You d o n ' t l i k e me.' He s a i d , 'No.' He s a i d , 'I want you t o move.' I s a i d , 'You want me t o move?' I s a i d , ' W e l l , I am,' I s a i d , 'as soon as I 4 CR-06-1398 c a n , b e c a u s e my S e c t i o n E i g h t [Government H o u s i n g Program] came t h r o u g h where we can f i n d i t , and I'm t r y i n g t o w a i t on my b a b y . ' He s a i d , 'You know what? You a r e g o i n g t o f i n d s o m e t h i n g , b e c a u s e I'm g o i n g t o make you move.' I s a i d , 'How you g o i n g t o make me move?' He s a i d , 'I'm g o i n g t o do s o m e t h i n g t o h u r t you.' I s a i d , ' W e l l , l i k e w h a t ? ' You know, a t f i r s t , I t h o u g h t he was t e a s i n g . And I l o o k e d a t him. I s a i d , 'Like what?' He s a i d , 'I'm g o i n g t o do s o m e t h i n g t o h u r t y o u . ' And he s a i d , 'What I'm g o i n g t o do t o h u r t you, you a i n ' t g o t no c h o i c e b u t t o move.' I s a i d , 'Why?' He s a i d , ' I t ' s g o i n g t o h u r t you so b a d , you t e l l -- you -- a f t e r he s a i d what I'm g o i n g t o do, he s a i d -- ( w i t n e s s c r y i n g ) -- 'You a i n ' t g o i n g t o be a b l e t o t a k e i t , ' he s a i d , 'because I'm g o i n g t o come a r o u n d . ' He s a i d , 'I'm g o i n g t o t u r n a r o u n d and do s o m e t h i n g t o h u r t you. They a i n ' t g o i n g t o do a damn t h i n g . ' He s a i d , 'You g o i n g t o know I d i d , and I'm g o i n g t o know I d i d . ' He s a i d , ' I w i l l d r i v e up and down t h i s a l l e y , s e l l i n g my d r u g s l i k e I n o r m a l l y do, and when I g e t t o y o u r h o u s e , ' he s a i d , 'when I g e t t o y o u r h o u s e -- ' God knows he d i d -- he s a i d , 'I'm g o i n g t o s i t r i g h t t h e r e , t u r n my m u s i c up l o u d e r , and w a i t u n t i l you t o come t o t h e d o o r . ' And he s a i d -- 'And e v e r y t i m e you see me, i t ' s g o i n g t o make you c r y , g o i n g t o h u r t you so b a d you a i n ' t g o i n g t o have no c h o i c e b u t t o move. You g o i n g t o be l o o k i n g a t me, know what I d i d and g o t away w i t h it.'" He t o l d me t h a t . " (R. 56-57.) "within She a week o r stated that two, no that c o n v e r s a t i o n took l o n g e r ; wasn't q u i t e two place weeks" b e f o r e the s h o o t i n g . A-Kia Hicks t e s t i f i e d and heard something Jackson tell t h a t she was Loretta that walking with Loretta "he was going t o h u r t h e r and make h e r move, and he was 5 to do going to CR-06-1398 -- he was going to come t h r o u g h the -- where she e v e r y day, and t u r n h i s m u s i c up when he g e t by h e r stay at, apartment, and i t w a s n ' t g o i n g t o be n o t h i n g t h a t she c o u l d do a b o u t i t , and he was do." (R. going his away w i t h w h a t e v e r he was going to 250.) Melanie "Wolf." to get Torrence testified She i d e n t i f i e d automobile. She that she knew Jackson as S t a t e ' s e x h i b i t 22 as a p h o t o g r a p h of t e s t i f i e d about a c o n f r o n t a t i o n between " W o l f " and an i n d i v i d u a l a t t h e P o o l e r e s i d e n c e a p p r o x i m a t e l y two weeks b e f o r e t h e s h o o t i n g where " W o l f " a c c u s e d t h e of c a l l i n g h i s c e l l u l a r t e l e p h o n e . person According to Torrence, she saw J a c k s o n on t h e m o r n i n g o f t h e s h o o t i n g s , and o v e r h e a r d him say something stated about h i s c o u s i n " P i g " b u y i n g t h a t Jackson i n d i c a t e d to her were g o i n g t o s h o o t "a new like that." The evening (R. State's of residence the at a gun; t h a t he SK o r s o m e t h i n g and Torrence his cousin -- some t y p e o f gun 132.) evidence shooting, further the approximately four 8:30 indicated victims p.m. to that left on the Loretta's return to the Montgomery r e s i d e n c e ; Pamela was d r i v i n g ; S h a n i e c e was i n the front was on passenger seat; Denarius 6 i n the backseat the CR-06-1398 d r i v e r ' s s i d e ; and M i l t o n was i n t h e b a c k s e a t on t h e p a s s e n g e r side. Denarius Loretta's Montgomery residence, down t h e a l l e y , testified he n o t i c e d with Jackson that Jackson's when automobile i n the d r i v e r ' s other i n d i v i d u a l s i n the automobile. they seat left parked and Denarius t e s t i f i e d two that as t h e y were d r i v i n g home, t h e y were s t o p p e d a t a r e d l i g h t a t an i n t e r s e c t i o n . D e n a r i u s s t a t e d t h a t t h e r e was an a u t o m o b i l e in front o f them and an automobile behind them. He also t e s t i f i e d t h a t t h e r e was an a u t o m o b i l e b e s i d e them. According to them. Denarius, another automobile p u l l e d up b e s i d e s t a t e d t h a t he h e a r d someone i n t h a t a u t o m o b i l e y e l l so he l o o k e d o v e r Denarius their further automobile and saw stated and Jackson that that d r i v i n g that Jackson he was opened 4 "Bitch" automobile. pointing fire. He He a gun a t further t e s t i f i e d t h a t t h e y were u n a b l e t o d r i v e away f r o m t h e g u n f i r e b e c a u s e o t h e r a u t o m o b i l e s were a l s o s t o p p e d i n f r o n t o f them, b e h i n d them, and b e s i d e them. A c c o r d i n g t o D e n a r i u s , he, h i s m o t h e r , S h a n i e c e , and M i l t o n a l l e x c l a i m e d t h a t t h e y h a d b e e n D e n a r i u s t e s t i f i e d t h a t he a l s o saw what a n o t h e r gun p o i n t e d a t them f r o m t h e b a c k s e a t automobile. 4 7 l o o k e d t o be of Jackson's CR-06-1398 hit by g u n f i r e . that "Wolf" testified "Wolf" further t e s t i f i e d that Milton said t h e one was that was Denarius doing Denarius also remark] that he was aware t h e gunman. the shooting; [before Denarius Milton's stated that t h e gunman's a u t o m o b i l e t u r n e d r i g h t a n d d r o v e away and t h a t t h e y b e g a n t o drive to the f i r e s t a t i o n to get assistance. that his drove mother a few blocks He testified before she lost c o n s c i o u s n e s s n e a r H o l y F a m i l y E l e m e n t a r y S c h o o l and t h a t h i s sister climbed i n t o t h e i r blocks to the f i r e m o t h e r ' s l a p and d r o v e station. r e t u r n e d from t r e a t i n g them. and a call a few m i n u t e s metal fragments. trial as t h e p e r s o n r e f e r r e d t o as Finally, residence. He following further injuries Denarius On c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i o n , D e n a r i u s anyone and t h a t t h e later and began A c c o r d i n g t o D e n a r i u s , he was s h o t i n t h e h a n d t h e l e g , and he a l s o s u s t a i n e d noticed final D e n a r i u s s t a t e d t h a t he went t o t h e d o o r o f t h e f i r e h o u s e , b u t nobody was t h e r e , firemen the them stated identified from Jackson at "Wolf." s t a t e d t h a t t h e y had not when that t o h i s arm he they saw left gunfire the Poole from the f r o n t s e a t and f r o m t h e b a c k s e a t o f t h e gunman's a u t o m o b i l e . A c c o r d i n g t o D e n a r i u s , a f t e r t h e g u n f i r e , an a u t o m o b i l e 8 that CR-06-1398 was behind them -- n o t t h e gunman's a u t o m o b i l e them as f a r as H o l y testified Family, but then t h a t he d i d n o t r e c a l l 18-wheeler drove telling was b e s i d e them a t t h e l i g h t -- f o l l o w e d away. Denarius the p o l i c e that an o r t h a t he c o u l d n o t i d e n t i f y the shooter. Shaniece Montgomery testified that she h a d s e e n n e a r P o o l e ' s r e s i d e n c e one o r two t i m e s b e f o r e . "Wolf" Her t e s t i m o n y r e g a r d i n g t h e e v e n t s a t t h e r e d l i g h t and t h e s u b s e q u e n t to the f i r e s t a t i o n were s u b s t a n t i a l l y s i m i l a r t o D e n a r i u s ' s testimony set automobile looked l i k e nighttime and out she above. She also testified that the a d a r k B u i c k C e n t u r y , b u t t h a t i t was was not e x h i b i t 22 as a p h o t o g r a p h to drive sure. She identified of "Wolf's" automobile. State's According S h a n i e c e , she h a d b e e n s h o t f o u r t i m e s , and she s t i l l had a b u l l e t n e a r h e r s p i n e t h a t t h e d o c t o r s h a d n o t removed. She s t a t e d t h a t "Wolf" and M i l t o n p r e v i o u s l y had a disagreement i n which "Wolf" identified had accused Milton Jackson at t r i a l of s t e a l i n g h i s dog. She as t h e p e r s o n she r e f e r r e d t o as "Wolf." L i s a Davis t e s t i f i e d station at the corner t h a t she w o r k e d a t t h e BP g a s o l i n e of 19th 9 Street and Avenue V in CR-06-1398 Smithfield, According the the i n t e r s e c t i o n where to Davis, she police officers from her vantage the heard gunfire assigned point to that she was shooting and t e l e p h o n e d one area. unable She to d i d not see Jackson at the stated identify a u t o m o b i l e s o r i n d i v i d u a l s were i n v o l v e d i n t h e t h a t she occurred. of that which shooting and scene. O f f i c e r John B a l l a r d of the Birmingham P o l i c e Department t e s t i f i e d t h a t he the scene. bystanders r e c e i v e d a c a l l f r o m D a v i s and He at testified that that he l o c a t i o n when he began heard p o l i c e r a d i o t h a t t h e v i c t i m s were a t t h e it, report on his f i r e s t a t i o n , so he he who did D e n a r i u s s t a t e d i n r e s p o n s e t h a t "Wolf d i d i t . " (R. 36.) The dead at after a s k e d him B a l l a r d described agitated, or Denarius's demeanor as the being fire s t a t i o n and transported t h a t he medical stressed, scared. S t a t e ' s e v i d e n c e i n d i c a t e d t h a t M i l t o n was testified the a with what h a p p e n e d and Officer D e n a r i u s and speaking O f f i c e r B a l l a r d t e s t i f i e d that proceeded to that l o c a t i o n . spoke w i t h responded to was examiner the who to that the Pamela d i e d hospital. associate performed 10 Dr. c o r o n e r and the pronounced a short time Greg Davis t h a t he autopsies on was the CR-06-1398 victims. According wound t o h i s passed passed forehead; through h e a r t , and t o Dr. D a v i s , M i l t o n had his his buttock. He consistent with a n o t h e r g u n s h o t wound where a b u l l e t r i g h t arm, stated the that Davis from some projectile that more t o w a r d h e r r i g h t lung. According and exited of right body t o Dr. He through Milton's an Pamela He liver; one s t a t e d t h a t he and a Davis, fifth or a minute or O f f i c e r Kim that stated body. four was gunshot higher went i n t o h e r t h e f o u r t h went i n t o h e r were target further chest, on chest, striking recovered four p r o j e c t i l e s projectile the n a t u r e of her from her sweater. i n j u r i e s w o u l d have l i k e l y r e s u l t e d i n a l o s s o f c o n s c i o u s n e s s a f t e r a few testified lung, right intermediate suffered b a c k ; one his injuries from M i l t o n ' s s t r u c k h e r d i a p h r a g m and t o r s o and her chest, striking Milton. testified f r a c t u r i n g r i b s ; and her his bullet striking r e c o v e r e d one wounds; one her into right hip s u c h as a c a r d o o r b e f o r e Dr. gunshot l e f t l u n g ; and a t h i r d g u n s h o t wound where a b u l l e t through t h a t he a grazing seconds so. McDonald of the Birmingham P o l i c e Department she photographed the scene. was She the evidence technician who s t a t e d t h a t b u l l e t f r a g m e n t s were 11 CR-06-1398 r e c o v e r e d from t h e c a r and t h a t s h e l l recovered casings from t h e scene Officer McDonald, there defects that d i s c e r n i b l e on t h e d o o r s vehicle. out were of the shooting. were approximately According to 10-15 h o l e s or or side of the was no way t o d e t e r m i n e how many b u l l e t s h a d t h e v e h i c l e t h r o u g h t h e windows. of the casings Mitch She s t a t e d t h a t one r e c o v e r e d f r o m t h e s c e n e was a 7.62 X 39 c a s i n g f o r an a s s a u l t rifle. Rector testified that he was a f i r e a r m mark e x a m i n e r f o r t h e B i r m i n g h a m P o l i c e D e p a r t m e n t . to Rector, were were She f u r t h e r i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e windows h a d b e e n s h o t but there entered and g l a s s According t h e p r o j e c t i l e s r e c o v e r e d from t h e v i c t i m s ' s b o d i e s consistent indicated and t o o l that with .30 c a l i b e r , 7.62 mm the casing where t h e s h o o t i n g recovered from projectiles. t h e roadway o c c u r r e d was a .39 c a l i b e r , 7.62 mm He f u r t h e r s t a t e d t h a t t h e c a s i n g s from t h e scene, t h e a u t o m o b i l e , He scene casing. and p r o j e c t i l e s r e c o v e r e d and t h e v i c t i m s b o d i e s were s i m i l a r , b u t t h a t he c o u l d n o t d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r t h e y h a d b e e n f i r e d f r o m t h e same b a r r e l . He d i d t e s t i f y t h a t t h e r e were no i n c o n s i s t e n c i e s present t h a t caused him t o b e l i e v e only t h a t he was u n a b l e t o make an a f f i r m a t i v e 12 otherwise, determination CR-06-1398 because the fragments d i d not c o n t a i n s u f f i c i e n t markings t o make s u c h a d e t e r m i n a t i o n . Brandon Carter t e s t i f i e d f o r the defense that Jackson p i c k e d h i m up f r o m work on t h e day o f t h e s h o o t i n g s a n d t h a t he, Milton Jackson's Edwards, and automobile when Jackson they were stopped riding at around a red in light. A c c o r d i n g t o C a r t e r , t h e y were b e h i n d t h e v i c t i m s a n d saw t h e s h o o t i n g , a n d t h a t t h e gunman was i n a b l u e T o y o t a Corolla right automobile. at the l i g h t , Carter stated but that automobile f o r a couple into Family Holy Jackson the f o l l o w i n g morning with Jackson; Jackson School. He c o n c e d e d t h e gunman turned followed the victims' of blocks u n t i l Elementary t o o k h i m home. that Tercel or the victims Carter pulled stated that t h a t he t o l d t h e p o l i c e t h a t he h a d n o t b e e n i n t h e a u t o m o b i l e according to Carter, he d i d n o t want to get involved. He i d e n t i f i e d S t a t e ' s e x h i b i t 22 as a p h o t o g r a p h o f Jackson's automobile. B a r b a r a Jackson, Jackson's mother, t e s t i f i e d . She s t a t e d t h a t J a c k s o n l e f t h e r h o u s e a r o u n d 4:40 p.m. on t h e d a y o f t h e murders evening. and r e t u r n e d a t a p p r o x i m a t e l y 9:00 p.m. that same She f u r t h e r t e s t i f i e d t h a t when he r e t u r n e d , J a c k s o n 13 CR-06-1398 said, "Mama, we w i t n e s s e d a shooting." (R. 281.) She s t a t e d t h a t J a c k s o n t o l d h e r t h a t M i l t o n Edwards a n d B r a n d o n were i n the car with him, and t h a t conversation about approximately 15 m i n u t e s house and t h a t left. the shooting. later she b e l i e v e d Finally, there a "repo Carter she s t a t e d She that was no f u r t h e r testified truck" got into Jackson Carter that came b y t h e t h e t r u c k and took Edwards home sometime b e t w e e n 11:30 p.m. a n d 11:45 p.m. I. Jackson f i r s t argues t h a t t h e p e n a l t y o f death by l e t h a l i n j e c t i o n i s c r u e l and u n u s u a l punishment i n v i o l a t i o n o f t h e E i g h t h Amendment o f t h e U n i t e d States brief, a general Jackson presented constitutionality only Constitution. of the death penalty. challenge At oral J a c k s o n i n d i c a t e d t h a t he h a d an a r g u m e n t p r e p a r e d to this i s s u e , b u t conceded majority of the United 128 States S. C t . 1520 ( 2 0 0 8 ) , asserted that that t o the arguments, with regard d e c i s i o n by a Supreme C o u r t i n B a z e v . R e e s , was a d v e r s e the dissent j o i n e d by J u s t i c e Souter, the recent In h i s filed to h i s position. He by J u s t i c e Ginsburg, and was s u p p o r t i v e o f h i s p o s i t i o n w i t h 14 CR-06-1398 regard to the p r o t o c o l , procedure, and a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f t h e l e t h a l i n j e c t i o n as a means o f e f f e c t u a t i n g t h e d e a t h p e n a l t y . This issue this Court. App. 2007), has been I n Saunders t h i s Court addressed v. S t a t e , by r e c e n t o p i n i o n s 10 So. 3d 53 from ( A l a . Crim. stated: "The U n i t e d S t a t e s Supreme C o u r t has h e l d t h a t t h e i m p o s i t i o n o f t h e d e a t h p e n a l t y as a s e n t e n c e f o r c a p i t a l murder i s n o t p e r se u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l . See G r e g g v. G e o r g i a , 428 U.S. 153, 96 S . C t . 2909, 49 L.Ed.2d 859 (1976). In addition, Alabama's c a p i t a l - m u r d e r s t a t u t e has been u p h e l d a g a i n s t a v a r i e t y of c o n s t i t u t i o n a l challenges. See, e . g . , C l a r k v. S t a t e , 896 So. 2d 584 ( A l a . C r i m . App. 2 0 0 0 ) , a n d c a s e s c i t e d t h e r e i n . T h i s C o u r t has a l s o h e l d t h a t l e t h a l i n j e c t i o n does n o t c o n s t i t u t e p e r se c r u e l a n d u n u s u a l p u n i s h m e n t . See, e . g . , McNabb v. S t a t e , 991 So. 2d 313 ( A l a . C r i m . App. 2 0 0 7 ) , a n d cases c i t e d t h e r e i n . T h e r e f o r e , Saunders's g e n e r a l c l a i m t h a t t h e death p e n a l t y c o n s t i t u t e s c r u e l and unusual punishment i s m e r i t l e s s . " 10 So. 3d a t 111. F u r t h e r , as t h i s C o u r t r e c e n t l y " ' [ C ] o u r t s have r e p e a t e d l y h e l d t h a t t h e d e a t h p e n a l t y i s n o t p e r se c r u e l and u n u s u a l punishment and t h a t e l e c t r o c u t i o n i s n o t a c r u e l a n d u n u s u a l method o f c a p i t a l punishment. See Z a n t v. S t e p h e n s , 462 U.S. 862, 103 S . C t . 2733, 77 L.Ed.2d 235 ( 1 9 8 3 ) ; P r o f f i t t v. F l o r i d a , 428 U.S. 242, 96 S . C t . 2960, 49 L.Ed.2d 913 ( 1 9 7 6 ) ; Furman v . G e o r g i a , 408 U.S. 238, 92 S . C t . 2726, 33 L.Ed.2d 346 ( 1 9 7 2 ) ; W i l l i a m s v . S t a t e , 627 So. 2d 985 ( A l a . C r i m . App. 1 9 9 1 ) , a f f ' d , 627 So.2d 999 ( A l a . 1 9 9 3 ) , c e r t . d e n i e d , 511 U.S. 1012, 114 S . C t . 1387, 128 L.Ed.2d 61 ( 1 9 9 4 ) ; B o y k i n v . 15 stated: CR-06-1398 S t a t e , 281 A l a . 659, 207 So. 2d 412 (1968) , (1968) r e v ' d on o t h e r g r o u n d s , 395 U.S. 238, 89 S.Ct. 1709, 23 L.Ed.2d 274 ( 1 9 6 9 ) . ' 8 9 "Wynn v. S t a t e , 804 So. 2d 1122, 1148 ( A l a . C r i m . App. 2 0 0 0 ) . A l s o , i n Ex p a r t e B e l i s l e , 11 So. 3d 323, 339 ( A l a . 2 0 0 8 ) , t h e A l a b a m a Supreme Court a d d r e s s e d t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s Supreme C o u r t ' s d e c i s i o n i n B a z e v. R e e s , 553 U.S. 35, 128 S.Ct. 1520, 170 L.Ed.2d 420 ( 2 0 0 8 ) , and ' c o n c l u d e [ d ] t h a t A l a b a m a ' s u s e o f l e t h a l i n j e c t i o n as a method o f e x e c u t i o n does n o t v i o l a t e t h e E i g h t h Amendment t o t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s C o n s t i t u t i o n . ' " T h e r e f o r e , Newton's a r g u m e n t i s without merit." Newton v. S t a t e , , [Ms. CR-05-1517, ( A l a . Crim. App. 2009) . [Ms. CR-06-1770, O c t . 2, 2009] 2009). Jackson different basis. this See a l s o So. 3d has p r e s e n t e d conclusion, O c t . 2, 2009] no Lewis v. 3d State, ( A l a . C r i m . App. arguments t h a t n o r does o u r r e s e a r c h r e v e a l Therefore, Jackson So. support any a such i s n o t e n t i t l e d t o any r e l i e f on claim. II. Jackson a l s o argues of t h a t c h a r g i n g him w i t h t h r e e c a p i t a l m u r d e r was m u l t i p l i c i t o u s convictions violated and sentence principles of of double death counts and t h a t h i s r e s u l t i n g f o r a l l three jeopardy. counts 5 I n h i s b r i e f , Jackson c i t e s l e g a l a u t h o r i t y d e r i v e d from B l o c k b u r g e r v. U n i t e d S t a t e s , 284 U.S. 299 ( 1 9 3 2 ) . At o r a l 5 16 CR-06-1398 S i m i l a r a r g u m e n t s have b e e n a d d r e s s e d a n d f o u n d m e r i t l e s s by 897 the appellate courts of this State. I n Ex p a r t e Peraita, So. 2d 1227 ( A l a . 2 0 0 4 ) , t h e A l a b a m a Supreme C o u r t s t a t e d : " P e r a i t a argues t h a t b o t h s t a t e and f e d e r a l law p r o h i b i t a s t a t e from s u b j e c t i n g a defendant t o double j e o p a r d y , and t h a t t h e i n d i c t m e n t charging him s o u g h t t o e x a c t ' m u l t i p l e p r o s e c u t i o n s ' f o r t h e same o f f e n s e . Blockburger v. U n i t e d S t a t e s , 284 U.S. 299, 52 S . C t . 180, 76 L . E d . 306 ( 1 9 3 2 ) . "The B l o c k b u r g e r t e s t i s a i m e d a t , among o t h e r t h i n g s , ' " m u l t i p l e punishments imposed i n a s i n g l e prosecution."' Grady v. C o r b i n , 495 U.S. 508, 516-17, 110 S . C t . 2084, 109 L.Ed.2d 548 (1990) ( q u o t i n g G a r r e t t v . U n i t e d S t a t e s , 471 U.S. 773, 778, 105 S . C t . 2407, 85 L.Ed.2d 764 (1985)). P e r a i t a a r g u e s t h a t c o n v i c t i o n o f two c o u n t s o f c a p i t a l murder f o r t h e k i l l i n g o f a s i n g l e p e r s o n c o n s t i t u t e s such m u l t i p l e punishment. He c i t e s Meyer v . S t a t e , 575 So. 2d 1212 ( A l a . C r i m . A p p . 1 9 9 0 ) , a n d Ex p a r t e R i c e , 766 So. 2 d 143 ( A l a . 1999), f o r t h e p r o p o s i t i o n t h a t m u l t i p l e charges from t h e same statute violate double-jeopardy principles. "The d e f e n d a n t i n M e y e r was c h a r g e d w i t h c a p i t a l murder and i n d i c t e d f o r t h r e e counts o f c a p i t a l murder f o r the k i l l i n g o f one p e r s o n . His indictment a l l e g e d t h a t he c o m m i t t e d t h e m u r d e r while committing robbery of three separate items. The C o u r t o f C r i m i n a l A p p e a l s h e l d t h a t t h e s e t h r e e a l l e g a t i o n s were m e r e l y t h r e e ' " a l t e r n a t i v e methods argument, Jackson further asserted that the p r i n c i p l e s e s p o u s e d i n S a n a b r i a v . U n i t e d S t a t e s , 437 U.S. 54 ( 1 9 7 8 ) , Ex p a r t e S i s s o n , 528 So. 2d 1159 ( A l a . 1 9 8 8 ) , Ex p a r t e R i c e , 766 So. 2d 143 ( A l a . 1 9 9 9 ) , a n d Ex p a r t e Robey, 920 So. 2d 1069 (Ala. 2004), supported h i s c o n c l u s i o n . 17 CR-06-1398 o f p r o v i n g t h e same c r i m e , a n d t h e r e f o r e , d i d n o t c o n s t i t u t e separate offenses."' M e y e r , 575 So. 2d a t 1217 ( q u o t i n g S i s s o n v. S t a t e , 528 So. 2 d 1159, 1162 (Ala. 1988)). I n R i c e , t h e d e f e n d a n t was c h a r g e d w i t h two c o u n t s o f c a p i t a l m u r d e r f o r t h e k i l l i n g o f one i n d i v i d u a l d u r i n g a r o b b e r y a n d a k i d n a p p i n g ; he was c o n v i c t e d o f two c o u n t s o f ' t h e c r i m e o f m u r d e r ' u n d e r A l a . Code 1975, § 1 3 A - 6 - 2 ( a ) ( 3 ) , specifically the l e s s e r - i n c l u d e d o f f e n s e o f f e l o n y murder. This C o u r t h e l d t h a t , much l i k e Meyer a n d S i s s o n , e a c h c o u n t i n R i c e was an a l t e r n a t i v e method o f p r o v i n g but a s i n g l e crime. "In contrast t o Meyer and R i c e , t h e two capital-murder charges a g a i n s t P e r a i t a are separate offenses. Each count o f c a p i t a l murder i s a s e p a r a t e o f f e n s e , as shown b y t h e b e g i n n i n g o f t h e s t a t u t e d e f i n i n g c a p i t a l offenses, which provides, 'The following are c a p i t a l offenses.' A l a . Code 1975, § 1 3 A - 5 - 4 0 ( a ) . So l o n g as e a c h c o u n t o f t h e c r i m e c o n c e r n s a s e p a r a t e o f f e n s e , as o p p o s e d t o a separate method of proving that offense, the double-jeopardy p r o v i s i o n of the United States Constitution i s not i m p l i c a t e d . We h o l d that P e r a i t a ' s r i g h t t o be f r e e f r o m d o u b l e j e o p a r d y was not v i o l a t e d by h i s h a v i n g been t r i e d and c o n v i c t e d o f two c o u n t s o f c a p i t a l m u r d e r f o r t h e k i l l i n g o f one i n d i v i d u a l . " 897 Oct. So. 2d a t 1236. 2, 2009] See a l s o L e w i s v. S t a t e , So. 3d [Ms. CR-06-1770, ( A l a . C r i m . App. 2 0 0 9 ) ; B r o o k s v . S t a t e , 973 So. 2d 380 ( A l a . C r i m . App. 2 0 0 7 ) ; a n d W i l l i a m s v. State, 710 So. 2d 1276 ( A l a . C r i m . App. 1996) . Here, each c a p i t a l - m u r d e r not required i n the other c o n v i c t i o n r e q u i r e d an e l e m e n t convictions. 18 One c o u n t required CR-06-1398 that Jackson intentionally s h o o t i n g h e r w h i l e he was killed Pamela Montgomery i n an a u t o m o b i l e ; one c o u n t by required t h a t J a c k s o n i n t e n t i o n a l l y k i l l e d M i l t o n P o o l e I I I by s h o o t i n g h e r w h i l e he was i n an a u t o m o b i l e ; and one c o u n t r e q u i r e d t h a t J a c k s o n i n t e n t i o n a l l y k i l l e d Montgomery and P o o l e by one or pursuant t o one scheme o r c o u r s e of conduct. act Thus, h i s a r g u m e n t i s w i t h o u t m e r i t , and J a c k s o n i s n o t e n t i t l e d t o any relief on t h i s claim. III. Finally, review the Jackson's R u l e 45A, record Ala.R.App.P., r e q u i r e s t h i s for any plain error with Court to respect to capital-murder convictions. R u l e 45A, Ala.R.App.P., p r o v i d e s : " I n a l l c a s e s i n w h i c h t h e d e a t h p e n a l t y has been imposed, t h e C o u r t of C r i m i n a l A p p e a l s s h a l l n o t i c e any p l a i n e r r o r o r d e f e c t i n t h e p r o c e e d i n g s under review, whether or not brought to the a t t e n t i o n o f t h e t r i a l c o u r t , and t a k e a p p r o p r i a t e a p p e l l a t e a c t i o n by r e a s o n t h e r e o f , w h e n e v e r s u c h e r r o r has o r p r o b a b l y has a d v e r s e l y a f f e c t e d t h e s u b s t a n t i a l r i g h t of the a p p e l l a n t . " " ' P l a i n e r r o r i s d e f i n e d as e r r o r t h a t has " a d v e r s e l y a f f e c t e d the s u b s t a n t i a l r i g h t of the a p p e l l a n t . " ' " So. 3d 933, 935 113, 121 Ex p a r t e Brown, 11 ( A l a . 2 0 0 8 ) , q u o t i n g H a l l v. S t a t e , 820 So. ( A l a . C r i m . App. 1999). 19 I t i s error "'"so 2d obvious CR-06-1398 that the fairness failure or to notice integrity of i t would the judicial S a u n d e r s v. S t a t e , 10 So. 3d 53, 74 quoting Ex p a r t e Womack, 435 So. seriously 2d 769 App. 2007), ( A l a . 1983), q u o t i n g i n t u r n U n i t e d S t a t e s v. Chaney, 662 F.2d 1148, (5th C i r . 1981). "'The s t a n d a r d o f r e v i e w i n r e v i e w i n g a c l a i m under the p l a i n - e r r o r d o c t r i n e i s stricter than the standard used in r e v i e w i n g an i s s u e t h a t was p r o p e r l y r a i s e d i n t h e t r i a l c o u r t o r on a p p e a l . As t h e United S t a t e s Supreme C o u r t stated i n U n i t e d S t a t e s v. Young, 470 U.S. 1, 105 S.Ct. 1038, 84 L.Ed.2d 1 (1985), the p l a i n - e r r o r d o c t r i n e a p p l i e s only i f the e r r o r i s " p a r t i c u l a r l y e g r e g i o u s " and i f i t "seriously affect[s] the fairness, i n t e g r i t y or p u b l i c r e p u t a t i o n of j u d i c i a l p r o c e e d i n g s . " See Ex p a r t e P r i c e , 725 So. 2d 1063 ( A l a . 1 9 9 8 ) , c e r t . d e n i e d , 526 U.S. 1133, 119 S.Ct. 1809, 143 L.Ed.2d 1012 ( 1 9 9 9 ) ; B u r g e s s v. S t a t e , 723 So. 2d 742 ( A l a . C r i m . App. 1 9 9 7 ) , a f f ' d , 723 So. 2d 770 ( A l a . 1 9 9 8 ) , c e r t . d e n i e d , 526 U.S. 1052, 119 S.Ct. 1360, 143 L.Ed.2d 521 ( 1 9 9 9 ) ; J o h n s o n v. S t a t e , 620 So. 2d 679, 701 ( A l a . C r i m . App. 1 9 9 2 ) , r e v ' d on o t h e r g r o u n d s , 620 So. 2d 709 ( A l a . 1 9 9 3 ) , on remand, 620 So. 2d 714 ( A l a . C r i m . A p p . ) , c e r t . d e n i e d , 510 U.S. 905, 114 S.Ct. 285, 126 L.Ed.2d 235 ( 1 9 9 3 ) . ' " H a l l v. S t a t e , 820 So. 2d 113, 121-22 ( A l a . C r i m . App. 1 9 9 9 ) , a f f ' d , 820 So. 2d 152 ( A l a . 2 0 0 1 ) . A l t h o u g h the f a i l u r e t o o b j e c t w i l l not p r e c l u d e our review, i t will weigh against any claim of 20 the proceedings."'" ( A l a . Crim. 766, affect 1152 CR-06-1398 p r e j u d i c e . See D i l l C r i m . App. 1 9 9 1 ) , v. S t a t e , 600 So. 2d 343 ( A l a . aff'd, 600 So. 2d 372 ( A l a . 1992)." S a l e v. S t a t e , We find 8 So. 3d 330, 345 no plain error ( A l a . C r i m . App. or defect d u r i n g the g u i l t phase o f Jackson's Further, i n the proceedings trial. § 13A-5-53, A l a . Code 1975, r e q u i r e s t h a t Court review the p r o p r i e t y this 2008). of the death sentence this imposed i n case. "This review s h a l l include the determination of w h e t h e r any e r r o r a d v e r s e l y a f f e c t i n g t h e r i g h t s o f the d e f e n d a n t was made i n t h e s e n t e n c e p r o c e e d i n g s , whether the t r i a l c o u r t ' s f i n d i n g s c o n c e r n i n g the aggravating and mitigating circumstances were s u p p o r t e d b y t h e e v i d e n c e , a n d w h e t h e r d e a t h was t h e proper sentence i n the case." § 1 3 A - 5 - 5 3 ( a ) , A l a . Code 1975. In d e t e r m i n i n g whether death was t h e a p p r o p r i a t e s e n t e n c e i n t h i s c a s e , we must d e t e r m i n e : (1) w h e t h e r t h e d e a t h s e n t e n c e was i m p o s e d u n d e r t h e i n f l u e n c e of passion, prejudice, whether an aggravating independent o r any o t h e r weighing circumstances and by arbitrary this mitigating factor; Court of (2) the circumstances i n d i c a t e s t h a t d e a t h i s t h e p r o p e r s e n t e n c e ; a n d (3) w h e t h e r the death sentence i s excessive or disproportionate 21 t o the CR-06-1398 p e n a l t y imposed i n o t h e r s i m i l a r cases, crime and t h e d e f e n d a n t . Here, hearing 1975. and the t r i a l applicable process, law and the jury § instructed i n the 1975, ordered p a r o l e or t o death. circumstance 1975; t h e n o n e x i s t e n c e circumstances that and received a Jackson to l i f e In i t s sentencing w r i t t e n f i n d i n g s as enumerated of each i n § 13A-5-49, of the m i t i g a t i n g e n u m e r a t e d i n § 13A-5-51, A l a . Code 1975; a n d nonstatutory mitigating circumstances u n d e r § 13A-5-52, A l a . Code 1975. sentencing sentencing The t r i a l c o u r t , i n a c c o r d a n c e court entered s p e c i f i c , aggravating Code on t h e o f 10 t o 2, a i d i t i n d e t e r m i n i n g whether t o sentence each circumstances i n v e s t i g a t i o n r e p o r t and conducted a n o t h e r h e a r i n g order, the t r i a l the being and d u t i e s t o death. sentencing a n d - 4 6 , A l a . Code recommended, b y a v o t e imprisonment without Ala. a separate 13A-5-45 and i t s role 13A-5-47, A l a . Code presentence to §§ circumstances J a c k s o n be s e n t e n c e d to with conducted A f t e r hearing evidence of the aggravating mitigating with See § 1 3 A - 5 - 5 3 ( b ) , A l a . Code 1975. court i n accordance c o n s i d e r i n g both the order also summarizing the crime contained and Jackson's 22 i t found The t r i a l written to exist court's written f i n d i n g s of participation fact in i t . CR-06-1398 The trial court found t h e e x i s t e n c e o f two s t a t u t o r y a g g r a v a t i n g c i r c u m s t a n c e s : (1) t h a t J a c k s o n k n o w i n g l y c r e a t e d a g r e a t r i s k o f d e a t h t o many p e r s o n s , s e e 1 3 A - 5 - 4 9 ( 3 ) , A l a . Code 1975; a n d (2) t h a t J a c k s o n i n t e n t i o n a l l y c a u s e d t h e d e a t h of two o r more p e r s o n s b y one a c t o r p u r s u a n t t o one scheme o r course trial § o f conduct, c o u r t found 13A-5-51, Ala. see § 13A-5-49(9), A l a . Code 1 9 7 5 . The no s t a t u t o r y mitigating circumstances i n Code The t r i a l court 1975. found and c o n s i d e r e d as n o n s t a t u t o r y m i t i g a t i n g c i r c u m s t a n c e s : "1. [Jackson] i s a g r e a t f a t h e r l o v e s and p r o v i d e s f o r . t o h i s s o n whom he "2. [ J a c k s o n ] i s good h e a r t e d p e r s o n a n d e v e r y o n e i n the n e i g h b o r h o o d r e a l l y l o v e s h i m . [ J a c k s o n ] t r e a t s his b a b y ' s mama w e l l a n d h a s n e v e r b e e n v i o l e n t towards her. He a l s o t r e a t s t h e d a u g h t e r o f h i s b a b y ' s mama w e l l as i f s h e were h i s own c h i l d . "3. [ J a c k s o n ] mission. gives kids money "4. [ J a c k s o n ] store. drives h i s elderly i n front of the neighbor tothe "5. [ J a c k s o n ] gave p e o p l e money a n d t o l d them n o t t o worry, about p a y i n g i t back. "6. [Jackson] has been v e r y h e l p f u l t o h i s mother. "7. [ J a c k s o n ' s ] m o t h e r , h i s b a b y ' s mama, h i s s i s t e r and f r i e n d s a l l l o v e h i m . He h a s b e e n a g o o d p r o v i d e r t o h i s b a b y ' s mama. 23 CR-06-1398 "8. [ J a c k s o n ] g e t s a d i s a b i l i t y c h e c k f o r an a l l e g e d p h y s i c a l d i s a b i l i t y , a n d g i v e s money t o t h o s e who need i t . "9. [ J a c k s o n ] n e v e r knew h i s r e a l f a t h e r , a n d h a d a 9th grade e d u c a t i o n . " (C. 49.) The trial court's sentencing order reflects following: "In d e t e r m i n i n g t h e s e n t e n c e s h e r e i n , t h e C o u r t has n o t been i n f l u e n c e d b y any r e f e r e n c e s o r e x p r e s s i o n s o f community s e n t i m e n t t h a t have b e e n made. Moreover, t h e Court has n o t c o n s i d e r e d , and has n o t b e e n i n f l u e n c e d b y , any i m p r o p e r matters t h a t may be c o n t a i n e d i n t h e p r e - s e n t e n c e r e p o r t . Upon c o n s i d e r i n g and w e i g h i n g the aggravating circumstances against the m i t i g a t i n g circumstances, the Court f i n d s t h a t the a g g r a v a t i n g circumstances g r e a t l y outweigh the m i t i g a t i n g circumstances. The C o u r t c o n s i d e r e d t h e e v i d e n c e p r e s e n t e d by [Jackson] at the sentencing hearing, where the jury p a r t i c i p a t e d , as e v i d e n c e o f n o n s t a t u t o r y m i t i g a t i n g factors. C o n s i d e r i n g the f a c t t h a t [Jackson] had s e v e r a l f a m i l y members t e s t i f y on h i s b e h a l f a l l o f whom a p p e a r e d t o g e n u i n e l y l o v e and c a r e f o r [ J a c k s o n ] , i t w o u l d be a s t r e t c h t o f i n d t h a t [ J a c k s o n ' s ] b a c k g r o u n d was one o f t o t a l d e p r i v a t i o n . Having weighed the statutory aggravating circumstances against a l l of the nonstatutory m i t i g a t i n g c i r c u m s t a n c e s , and h a v i n g g i v e n c a r e f u l c o n s i d e r a t i o n and s u b s t a n t i a l weight t o t h e evidence and t h e j u r y ' s a d v i s o r y r e c o m m e n d a t i o n , t h e C o u r t f i n d s that the aggravating circumstances i n these cases o u t w e i g h t h e m i t i g a t i n g c i r c u m s t a n c e s and t h a t t h e p u n i s h m e n t s h o u l d be d e a t h , i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e j u r y ' s r e c o m m e n d a t i o n o f t e n (10) f o r d e a t h a n d two (2) f o r l i f e w i t h o u t p a r o l e , w i t h r e s p e c t t o 24 the CR-06-1398 e a c h c o n v i c t i o n o f C a p i t a l M u r d e r as c h a r g e d indictments." (C. i n the 50.) Pursuant to the requirements o f § 1 3 A - 5 - 5 3 ( a ) , we have r e v i e w e d t h e r e c o r d o f t h e s e n t e n c i n g p r o c e e d i n g s and f i n d error, plain or rights. We f i n d no imposed under otherwise, the adversely evidence t h a t the sentence influence other a r b i t r a r y factor. affecting of any no Jackson's of death was passion, prejudice, or The t r i a l c o u r t ' s f i n d i n g s c o n c e r n i n g t h e a g g r a v a t i n g c i r c u m s t a n c e s and m i t i g a t i n g c i r c u m s t a n c e s a r e supported by the record. independently weighed the the mitigating Further, this Court aggravating circumstances circumstances, and we concur against w i t h the court's c o n c l u s i o n t h a t the aggravating circumstances c o m m i t t e d and of death 2000), Finally, c o n s i d e r i n g J a c k s o n , we in disproportionate cases. i n t h i s case. this to case the is penalty See M c G r i f f v. S t a t e , 908 c o n s i d e r i n g the f i n d t h a t the neither imposed So. r e v e r s e d on o t h e r g r o u n d s 908 2d 961 other crime nor similar ( A l a . Crim. So. 2d 1024 the sentence excessive in trial outweigh t h e m i t i g a t i n g c i r c u m s t a n c e s , and we a g r e e t h a t d e a t h was proper sentence has App. ( A l a . 2004); ( u p h o l d i n g d e a t h s e n t e n c e f o r m u r d e r by use o f a d e a d l y weapon 25 CR-06-1398 f i r e d f r o m a m o t o r v e h i c l e ) ; L e w i s v. S t a t e , O c t . 2, 2009] So. 3d [Ms. CR-06-1770, ( A l a . C r i m . App. 2009) (upholding d e a t h p e n a l t y f o r m u r d e r b y u s e o f a d e a d l y weapon f i r e d a motor v e h i c l e ) ; M i l l s 2008] So. 3d t o remand) v. S t a t e , ( A l a . C r i m . App. 2008) and B r o w n f i e l d v. S t a t e , 2007] So. 3d the convictions Jackson's ( o p i n i o n on r e t u r n foregoing reasons, and h i s s e n t e n c e convictions imprisonment f o r two [Ms. CR-04-0743, A p r i l ( A l a . C r i m . App. 2007) f o r m u r d e r o f two o r more For S e p t . 26, ( u p h o l d i n g d e a t h p e n a l t y f o r m u r d e r o f two o r more persons); penalty [Ms. CR-06-2246, from and counts death persons). Jackson's of death consecutive of (upholding 27, capital-murder are hereby sentences attempted murder affirmed. of life are also affirmed. AFFIRMED. W i s e , P . J . , and W e l c h , Windom, and K e l l u m , J J . , c o n c u r . 26

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.