State v. Jackson

• Decision Date: 11 August 2014
• Docket Number: NO. 69423-5-I,69423-5-I
• Court: Washington Court of Appeals
• Parties: STATE OF WASHINGTON, Respondent, v. ROY PURCELL JACKSON, JR., Appellant.

STATE OF WASHINGTON, Respondent, v. ROY PURCELL JACKSON, JR., Appellant.

NO. 69423-5-I

COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON DIVISION ONE

August 11, 2014

UNPUBLISHED OPINION

LEACH, J. — Roy Jackson Jr. appeals his conviction for assault in the first degree and assault in the second degree. He claims that his guilty plea was involuntary because he received misinformation about the sentencing consequences of this plea. Jackson also claims that the trial court abused its discretion when it denied his request for a competency evaluation and that the court had no authority to impose a lifetime no-contact order. Because Jackson shows no error, we affirm.

FACTS

On April 20, 2011, while riding a Metro bus, Jackson shot passenger Antoine Greenhaigh twice in the stomach. Jackson then pointed the gun at the bus driver, Margaret Caster, and told her to open the door to let him out. After Caster complied, Jackson ran away.

The State charged Jackson with first degree assault against Greenhaigh and second degree assault against Caster. The State sought firearm enhancements on both counts.

After Jackson's arraignment, Dr. Kenneth Muscatel, an expert from the King County Office of the Public Defender, evaluated Jackson "to see if . . . [Jackson] had a defense of diminished capacity." Muscatel described Jackson as "a paranoid, suspicious but also rather cagey individual," who claimed no memory of the shooting initially based upon the "misplaced belief that not remembering what occurred was sufficient for a mental defense." Muscatel determined that Jackson "has chronic paranoid features and was high on Sherm and marijuana at the time of the alleged incident." He opined that Jackson had the "capacity to form the general intent to pull, point and shoot the gun at the victim" and that "there is insufficient information to conclude he was so impaired he couldn't form the intent to assault." Muscatel concluded that Jackson "does not meet the level of Diminished Capacity." In his report, Muscatel stated that he had "little doubt" that Jackson "engaged in this conduct due to factors of mental health and substance abuse. Such factors meet the criteria for a court to consider as mitigating factors in rendering a sentence if Mr. Jackson were found guilty of this offense."

On November 23, 2011, defense counsel Kris Jensen asked for a competency evaluation at Western State Hospital because Jackson was "inconsistent in his communicating" with Jensen. Jensen stated that hisconversations with Jackson "have always been . . . hit or miss. Sometimes he is with me, sometimes he is not [with] me; sometimes we have nutty discussions, and sometimes they are kind of on point." He told the court that his initial requests to visit Jackson in jail were unsuccessful. Because Jackson was "being very uncooperative," jail personnel would not bring him out. Jensen stated that on November 14, 2011, he visited Jackson, who was "completely off his rocker." Jensen explained that although Jackson recognized Jensen during that visit, Jackson was yelling, punching the glass, "pointing to a Band-Aid on the inside of his arm, saying that, They are doing things to him. Look at, they took my blood. They stabbed me with things. You can't believe what they are doing to me—kind of yelling around the room." Jensen acknowledged that Jackson understood the charges against him and was sometimes helpful in analyzing the case.

The State opposed the defense request for a competency evaluation. The prosecutor noted, "The question before the Court is whether Mr. Jackson, sitting before the Court today, is competent to be here." The State played a recorded jail phone call from November 7, 2011, in which Jackson stated, "I am going to tell you more when you come here to visit me because I don't know, I might try to pump—act like I am—thinking I ought to win, and then just wait for a visit, you know what I'm saying?" The prosecutor told the court, "That would be the relevant part of the conversation where he says 'I am going to act like'—and he uses kind of lingo for crazy . . . . 'I am going to act like I am crazy and wait for a better offer.'" The State also played a recorded jail phone call from November14, 2011, the day that defense counsel characterized Jackson as "off his rocker." In this call, which Jackson had someone place on his behalf, the caller communicated Jackson's message that "he is hoping to go to Western." The State noted that Jackson appeared lucid in both of these phone calls.

The trial court denied Jackson's motion for a competency evaluation. The court reasoned,

I certainly think that there are some issues here that are appropriately before the Court, in terms of what has been diagnosed as a polysubstance dependence—some kind of paranoid features, and so forth—but it sounds to me like the defendant is able to understand the nature of the charges against him, and it sounds to me like the defendant is reasonably able to assist in his—in his defense—by talking with counsel.

The fact that he may be paranoid, at times, does not suggest to me that he is unable to communicate with counsel; the fact that he had an episode on the 22nd—no, that was November 14, two weeks ago, does not suggest to me that he would not be able to confer with counsel.

It may in fact involve special meeting times and so forth and so on, and may be a truncated schedule, but I don't see anything that suggests, on this record, that he is unable to assist the defense.

And again, really—the forensic psychological evaluation from Dr. Muscatel suggests that there could be some convenient lapses in judgment on the part of the defendant, and that would not support the request to have him evaluated.

On May 15, 2012, Jackson pleaded guilty as charged. Paragraph 6(i) of Jackson's statement on the guilty plea stated,

IN CONSIDERING THE CONSEQUENCES OF MY GUILTY PLEA(S), I UNDERSTAND THAT:

. . . .

The crime of Assault 1 has a mandatory minimum sentence of at least 5 years of total confinement. The law does not allow any reduction of this sentence. . . . [If not applicable, this paragraph should be stricken and initialed by the defendant and judge.]

Jackson crossed out and initialed this paragraph, but the judge did not. In the margin of the document, a handwritten bracket appears around this paragraph along with the word "Applies."

At the plea colloquy hearing, Jackson told the court that he had an opportunity to review the plea form with his attorney. The court asked Jackson if he understood "paragraph i—and this is on page 5—applies? So that assault in the first degree does have a mandatory minimum sentence of five years. Do you understand that?" Jackson replied, "Yes." The court found the plea to be knowing, intelligent, and voluntary.

Before sentencing, Jackson moved to withdraw his guilty plea based upon ineffective assistance of counsel. He told the court,

Well, I feel like I was really manipulated into taking this plea agreement or whatever, and basically a while back, Kris Jensen, he stated that if I showed the prosecutor this thing that I did with this doctor named Muscatel . . . . that I could get 15 years, you know what I'm saying? And basically that didn't happen, it was said 15 years to 21, and I feel like that is against my rights, and I would like to be able to stand trial, and I asked Kris Jensen to file motions for me, and he said that he would not file these motions for me—to get into Western State, and things of that nature, because I really have mental problems, and he wouldn't do any of those motions.

The court appointed additional counsel to advise Jackson if a legal basis existed on which to withdraw his guilty plea.

On September 19, 2012, Jackson's new attorney filed a motion to withdraw his guilty plea. Jackson claimed that he "was confused about the proceedings and about the evidence against him" and that he "had not enough time to talk to his attorney about the case but was pressured to take the deal byhis attorney and his family." He alleged that Jensen failed to "accommodate Mr. Jackson's mental illnesses and ensure his comprehension of complex legal and factual matters." Jackson also asserted that Jensen "did not conduct the necessary investigation in order to provide Mr. Jackson with sufficient information to make a knowing and intelligent waiver."

At a hearing on this motion, Jackson alleged that he did not have enough information to make a valid waiver. His attorney argued,

[H]e has been provided with some discovery, but not all of it; he had a couple of witnesses interviewed, but not all of them; and the defense position is that because not all of the information was provided to Mr. Jackson, and not all of the important witnesses were interviewed in this case, Mr. Jackson was not able to make a valid waiver of his rights at the time that he did the guilty plea.

The court determined that Jackson failed to show ineffective assistance of counsel sufficient to withdraw his guilty plea. The court reasoned, "There is nothing in the record to indicate that he was coerced or forced into pleading guilty—but perhaps most importantly, there is absolutely nothing in the record to show prejudice in this case." The court concluded, "Mr. Jackson has admitted to committing these heinous crimes, he has waived his trial rights, and stated that he voluntarily was making his plea of guilty, so the motion to withdraw the guilty plea is denied."

The court imposed standard range sentences of 162 months on the first degree assault count and 43 months on the second degree assault count, to run concurrently, and firearm enhancements of 60 months and 36 months, respectively, to run consecutively. The court also imposed 36 months ofcommunity custody and an order prohibiting contact with Greenhaigh and Caster for life.

Jackson appeals.

ANALYSIS

Jackson raises three issues. First, he claims that his guilty plea is invalid because "he was misinformed that a mandatory minimum sentence would be imposed for the...