Jackson v. State

Decision Date25 April 2003
Citation886 So.2d 153
PartiesHayden Jerome JACKSON v. STATE of Alabama.
CourtAlabama Court of Criminal Appeals

Glenn L. Davidson, Mobile, for appellant.

William H. Pryor, Jr., atty. gen., and J. Thomas Leverette, asst. atty. gen., for appellee. BASCHAB, Judge.

AFFIRMED BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM.

McMILLAN, P.J., and SHAW and WISE, JJ., concur; COBB, J., dissents, with opinion.

COBB, Judge, dissenting.

I must respectfully dissent from the majority's unpublished memorandum affirming Hayden Jerome Jackson's conviction for first-degree unlawful possession of marijuana. The majority has held that, under the facts of this case, the search and seizure initiated at the safety checkpoint roadblock was valid and constitutional.

From the law quoted by the majority, it is clear that the United States Supreme Court has held that roadblocks, otherwise considered an invalid, warrantless search and seizure, are reasonable in two instances in which the governmental interest has been proven to be distinct from general law enforcement purposes — border patrol to control the problem posed by the unchecked flow of illegal immigrants into this country and sobriety checkpoints to control the widespread problem of drunk driving in this country. See United States v. Martinez-Fuerte, 428 U.S. 543, 96 S.Ct. 3074, 49 L.Ed.2d 1116 (1976), and Michigan Dep't of State Police v. Sitz, 496 U.S. 444, 110 S.Ct. 2481, 110 L.Ed.2d 412 (1990). Neither the courts of this State, nor the United States Supreme Court, have ever upheld the constitutionality of a search resulting from a roadblock set up for general law enforcement purposes, as such general purposes do not outweigh the liberty interests of those people forced to endure the search.

In this case, the roadblock was set up as part and parcel of a contract between the Mobile Housing Authority and the police department in an attempt to control crime in the housing project in question. An officer claimed that he smelled marijuana during the stop of Jackson's vehicle, and he made Jackson pull his vehicle to the side of the road. The subsequent warrantless search yielded marijuana. During the suppression hearing, the following relevant pieces of testimony were elicited from Sgt. Frank Cassidy, who was supervising the six-man unit that set up the roadblock:

"[Defense counsel]: So you're saying that the Sheriff told you to go patrol the RV Taylor Projects.
"[Witness]: The Sheriff himself did not tell me, no, sir. The Mobile County Sheriff's Department has a contract agreement with the Housing Board Authority that on certain dates, that we will come in and patrol the area that they designate. I got my direct orders from Captain Crosby.
"....
"[Defense counsel]: Well, was this a criminal investigation or a traffic investigation your seven-man unit was doing?
"[Witness]: We were doing — we were doing — if you had to put it in one of those categories, I would call it traffic. We were looking for safety devices.
"[Defense counsel]: All right. So your testimony is the Mobile Housing Board was concerned about the traffic violations in the projects and wanted you guys to go in and check on people's driver's licenses?
"[Witness]: Housing projects — housing board authorities did not specify what they wanted us to do. We were asked to put a presence inside RV Taylor and we arrived. I took a six-man unit into RV Taylor.
"[Defense counsel]: Is there anything in writing from the Housing Board that you received showing what type of presence you were supposed to be doing?
"[Witness]: We have a contract with them that specifies that we will go into an area that they govern at their request. It states that we will do rolling patrol, foot patrol, community policing, safety checkpoints."1

(R. 12-14.)

"[Witness]: We were working inside of RV Taylor at the request of the Housing Board.... We did the safety
...

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 cases
  • Ex parte Jackson
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • 20 Febrero 2004
    ...et seq., Ala.Code 1975. The Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed Jackson's conviction and sentence without an opinion. Jackson v. State, 886 So.2d 153 (Ala.Crim.App.2003). Jackson petitioned this Court for certiorari review. We granted the petition to review whether the roadblock-type stop co......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT