Jackson v. State
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Cite as 2011 Ark. App. 620 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION I No. CACR11-14 Opinion Delivered DEREK LEE JACKSON APPELLANT V. STATE OF ARKANSAS APPELLEE October 12, 2011 APPEAL FROM THE PULASKI COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, SECOND DIVISION [NO. CR-09-840] HONORABLE CHRISTOPHER CHARLES PIAZZA, JUDGE REMANDED FOR SUPPLEMENTAL ADDENDUM WAYMOND M. BROWN, Judge A Pulaski County jury found appellant Derek Lee Jackson guilty of the second-degree murder of Anthony Fogle. He was sentenced to thirty years imprisonment with an additional fifteen years enhancement for using a firearm in the commission of the murder. Jackson contends that the trial court erred by denying his motion to suppress when (1) his statement was the product of coercion and (2) the police violated his rights by improperly re-initiating contact with him after he had invoked his rights. He also argues that the trial court erred by denying his motion to dismiss on due-process grounds due to the city s failure to preserve evidence. We are unable to reach the merits of Jackson s arguments at this time due to deficiencies in his addendum. Cite as 2011 Ark. App. 620 Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-2(a)(8)1 provides that jury-verdict forms are to be included in the addendum when there is a jury trial. The rule also states that all exhibits concerning the order, judgment, or ruling challenged on appeal should be included in the addendum. Here, Jackson has failed to provide the jury-verdict forms and the exhibits concerning the judgment on appeal, including, but not limited to: (1) the Miranda rights form, (2) the DVD recording introduced at the suppression hearing, (3) the recorded confession introduced at the jury trial, (4) the pictures of appellant s car that were identified by an eyewitness. Jackson has seven days to file a supplemental addendum.2 We strongly encourage appellate counsel, prior to filing the supplemental addendum, to review our rules as well as the record and addenda to ensure that no additional deficiencies are present. Remanded for supplementation of the addendum. VAUGHT, C.J., and HOOFMAN, J., agree. 1 (2011). 2 Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4 2(b)(4). See In re 4-2(b)(4) of the Rules of the Supreme Court and Court of Appeals, 2011 Ark. 141. -22
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.
