State v. Jackson, 11657-6-I
| Decision Date | 23 January 1984 |
| Docket Number | No. 11657-6-I,11657-6-I |
| Citation | 676 P.2d 517,36 Wn.App. 510 |
| Parties | STATE of Washington, Respondent, v. Charles Martinez JACKSON, Appellant. |
| Court | Washington Court of Appeals |
Washington Appellate Defender, Nancy Talner (court-appointed), Seattle, for appellant.
Norman K. Maleng, King County Pros. Atty., Linda Walton, Deputy Pros. Atty., Seattle, for respondent.
Charles Jackson appeals his judgment and sentence on one count of indecent liberties and one count of second degree rape. He contends the trial court erred in admitting evidence of an assault that occurred in 1974.
On August 31, 1981, 12-year-old Kim was walking home from school when a man came up behind her, put his hand over her mouth, and carried her into the woods. He wrapped a cloth around her eyes, punched her in the stomach and engaged in sexual intercourse with her. The man was not immediately apprehended.
On September 14, 1981, Suzanne, 14 years old, was walking home from school when a man grabbed her from behind and put his hand over her mouth. He put his other hand on her lower abdomen and vigorously moved his hips back and forth against her. A neighbor who witnessed the incident, yelled at the man and scared him away. Jackson was apprehended a short distance from the scene, in a cul-de-sac where he had parked his car. The neighbor identified Jackson as the man he had seen "hunching" Suzanne.
Police arrested Jackson and charged him with taking indecent liberties with Suzanne. Subsequently, Jackson was also charged with the second degree rape of Kim. Kim later identified Jackson in court.
Prior to trial, Jackson moved to suppress testimony regarding a 1974 incident in which he assaulted Cheryl, 1 then aged 13. Cheryl had been walking home from school in West Seattle when she was grabbed from behind and pulled into an alley near her home. The assailant's car was parked nearby. The assailant let Cheryl go after she screamed and a neighbor drove by.
In support of the motion to suppress, Jackson argued that the 1974 incident was not sufficiently similar to the charged crimes to meet the requirements of ER 404(b). The prosecution argued that evidence of the incident was relevant to prove identity with respect to the rape of Kim (count II) and absence of mistake or accident with respect to the incident involving Suzanne (count I). The trial court denied the motion to suppress, and Cheryl testified regarding the 1974 assault at the end of the State's case-in-chief. However, the court did not indicate on what theory it admitted this evidence. Nor did the court instruct the jury regarding the purpose for which the evidence was being admitted at the time of Cheryl's testimony.
At trial, Jackson raised an alibi defense as to the rape charge. With respect to the indecent liberties charge, Jackson argued that he reached out to put his hand on Suzanne's shoulder so he could speak with her, but mistakenly put his hand over her mouth. He asserted that he thought Suzanne had made a derogatory remark to him, and that his intention was only to find out what she had said.
Jackson first contends that the trial court erred because it did not rule on the record that the probative value of the prior incident outweighed its prejudicial effect. We disagree. A helpful analogy is found in the requirements for admitting prior felony convictions for impeachment purposes pursuant to ER 609. Although ER 609 also requires the court to balance probative value against prejudicial effect, it is not mandatory that the trial court state its reasons for admitting the evidence. See State v. Thompson, 95 Wash.2d 888, 893, 632 P.2d 50 (1981). The record need only reflect adequate consideration of the potential for prejudice in light of its probative value. Thompson, at 891-93, 632 P.2d 50; State v. Anderson, 31 Wash.App. 352, 641 [676 P.2d 520] P.2d 728 (1982). 2 At the pretrial hearing, counsel submitted briefs on the issue which the court acknowledged reading. The parties also presented oral argument. We conclude that the record reflects full consideration of the parties' positions, the value of the evidence and the potential for prejudice.
Appellant next contends that it was error to admit evidence of the 1974 assault under ER 404(b). Insofar as the evidence was admitted as being relevant in connection with the indecent liberties charge, appellant is mistaken. ER 404(b) states:
Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show that he acted in conformity therewith. It may, however, be admissible for other purposes, such as proof of motive opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident.
(Emphasis added.) Here, Jackson's intent was placed directly in issue with respect to the indecent liberties charge. Jackson testified that he mistakenly put his hand on Suzanne's mouth. He said that he thought she had called him a derogatory name, and that his only intention was to find out what she had said. Evidence of Jackson's 1974 assault tends to negate that his touching of Suzanne was merely accidental. See State v. Bouchard, 31 Wash.App. 381, 384-85, 639 P.2d 761 (1982).
The relevance of the 1974 assault with respect to Jackson's identity as to the rape charge is more problematic. Admittedly, points of similarity between charged and prior crimes are admissible to prove the identity of the perpetrator of the charged crime. See State v. Goebel, 40 Wash.2d 18, 22-23, 240 P.2d 251 (1952). Because Jackson denied being at the rape scene, identity was clearly in issue. However, when identity is sought to be established based on the factual similarity of a prior crime, a very high degree of similarity is required. As we stated in State v. Irving, 24 Wash.App. 370, 601 P.2d 954 (1979):
Mere similarity of crimes will not justify the introduction of other criminal acts under the rule. There must be something distinctive or unusual in the means employed in such crimes and the crime charged.
Irving, at 374, 601 P.2d 954, quoting 5 R. Meisenholder, Wash.Prac. § 4, at 13 (1965). Accord, State v. Fernandez, 28 Wash.App. 944, 950, 628 P.2d 818, 640 P.2d 731 (1980).
In denying Jackson's motion to suppress, the trial court referred to five points of similarity: (1) the victims were all young girls, (2) the attacks occurred in close proximity to schools at a time when the victims were walking home, (3) all three girls were grabbed from behind, (4) Jackson's car was hidden from view and facing outwards seemingly in order to permit a speedy departure, and (5) two of the girls were dragged some distance. We are unable to see how these similarities render the 1974 assault sufficiently probative of Jackson's identity as Kim's rapist. Even assuming, as the State contends, that a "signature" crime is unnecessary, the similarities outlined above nonetheless fail to reveal anything particularly distinctive or unusual about the means employed by Jackson in committing the 1974 assault and the rape of Kim. Most of these characteristics seem typical of the methods used in numerous sex crimes committed against young girls. 3
Even...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Cruz, No. 35011-4-II (Wash. App. 6/28/2007)
...sufficient to allow review of the issues he raises. State v. Garcia, 45 Wn. App. 132, 140, 724 P.2d 412 (1986) (citing State v. Jackson, 36 Wn. App. 510, 516, 676 P.2d 517, aff'd, 102 Wn.2d 689 (1984)). Although the record here shows that the trial court extended the speedy trial date a sec......
-
State v. Cruz
... ... State ... v. Garcia , 45 Wn. App. 132, 140, 724 P.2d 412 (1986) ... (citing State v. Jackson , 36 Wn. App. 510, 516, 676 ... P.2d 517, aff'd , 102 Wn.2d 689 (1984)). Although ... the record here shows that the trial court ... ...
-
State v. Trainor, 29429-3-III
...the purpose of this appeal and therefore those exhibits are not part of the record before this court. RAP 9.1(a); State v. Jackson, 36 Wn. App. 510, 516, 676 P.2d 517 (1984). However, the substance of the photographs is apparent from the record. The photographs were all pictures of E.M.W. w......
-
Halverson v. Loughney Properties, Inc., No. 62543-8-I (Wash. App. 12/28/2009)
...relevant to the issue." Allemeier v. Univ. of Wash., 42 Wn. App. 465, 472, 712 P.2d 306 (1985) (citing RAP 9.2(b); State v. Jackson, 36 Wn. App. 510, 516, 676 P.2d 517, aff'd, 102 Wn.2d 689, 689 P.2d 76 (1984)). Where the appellant challenges a verdict as not being supported by the evidence......