State v. Jackson

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, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Appellee, v. GILL MORRIS JACKSON, Appellant. DIVISION ONE FILED: 10-07-2010 RUTH WILLINGHAM, ACTING CLERK BY: GH 1 CA-CR 09-0878 DEPARTMENT C MEMORANDUM DECISION (Not for Publication Rule 111, Rules of the Arizona Supreme Court) Appeal from the Superior Court in Maricopa County Cause No. CR2009-134944-001 DT The Honorable Edward O. Burke, Judge AFFIRMED Terry Goddard, Attorney General by Kent E. Cattani, Chief Counsel, Criminal Appeals/Capital Litigation Section Attorneys for Appellee Phoenix James J. Haas, Maricopa County Public Defender by Cory Engle, Deputy Public Defender Attorneys for Appellant Phoenix P O R T L E Y, Judge ¶1 738 This is an appeal under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. (1967) and State v. Leon, 104 Ariz. 297, 451 P.2d 878 (1969). Counsel for Gill Morris Jackson ( Defendant ) has advised us that, after searching the entire record, she has been unable to discover any arguable questions of law, and has filed an opening brief requesting us to conduct an Anders review of the record. Defendant has not taken the opportunity he was given to file a supplemental brief. FACTS 1 ¶2 After having chest pains earlier in the day and going to the hospital, Defendant had just returned home when he was again asked to return some borrowed Tupperware. He got angry, went into his apartment, returned and pushed a sharp samurai sword to the victim s throat, which scared him. grabbed the sword from Defendant and threw The victim it into his apartment. ¶3 Defendant was subsequently arrested and charged with aggravated assault, a class 3 dangerous felony. He pled not guilty and went to trial. ¶4 In addition to the testimony of the victim and other witnesses for the State, Defendant testified. He told the jury that the victim, who was drunk, came into his apartment with a knife demanding the return of 1 the borrowed Tupperware. He We review the facts in the light most favorable to sustaining the verdict. See State v. Guerra, 161 Ariz. 289, 293, 778 P.2d 1185, 1189 (1989). 2 stated that he grabbed his sword from its display case and deliberated and pushed the victim out of his apartment. ¶5 The found Defendant offense. five jury, after guilty being of instructed, aggravated assault, a dangerous He was subsequently sentenced to a mitigated term of years in prison and given credit for 105 this appeal days of pursuant to presentence incarceration. ¶6 We have jurisdiction over Article 6, Section 9, of the Arizona Constitution, and Arizona Revised Statutes ( A.R.S. ) sections 12-120.21(A)(1) (2003), 134031, and -4033(A)(1) (2010). DISCUSSION ¶7 We have read and considered the opening brief, and have searched the entire record for reversible error. none. See Leon, 104 Ariz. at 300, 451 P.2d at 881. We find All of the proceedings were conducted in compliance with the Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure. Defendant was The record, as presented, reveals that represented by counsel at all stages of the proceedings, and the sentence imposed was within the statutory limits. CONCLUSION ¶8 After this decision has been filed, counsel s obligation to represent Defendant has ended. appellate Counsel need do no more than inform Defendant of the status of the 3 appeal and Defendant s future options, unless counsel s review reveals an issue appropriate for submission Supreme Court by petition for review. to the Arizona See State v. Shattuck, 140 Ariz. 582, 585, 684 P.2d 154, 157 (1984). Defendant can, if desired, or file a motion for reconsideration petition for review pursuant to the Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure. ¶9 Accordingly, we affirm Defendant s conviction and sentence. /s/ ________________________________ MAURICE PORTLEY, Presiding Judge CONCURRING: /s/ ____________________________ MARGARET H. DOWNIE, Judge /s/ ____________________________ PATRICIA A. OROZCO, Judge 4

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.