State v Thompson & Jackson

• Decision Date: 09 August 2001
• Docket Number: 98-00351
• Parties: STATE OF TENNESSEE v. CHARLES THOMPSON and VERICO JACKSONIN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON
• Court: Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals

STATE OF TENNESSEE v CHARLES THOMPSON and VERICO JACKSON

No. W1998-00351-CCA-R10-CD

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON

May 9, 2000 Session

Filed August 9, 2001

Direct Appeal from the Criminal Court for Shelby County, No. 96-11968, 97-05622

Chris Craft, Judge

On October 31, 1996, a Shelby County Grand Jury indicted Charles Thompson and Verico Jackson for first-degree murder.Later, the defendants were also indicted for conspiracy to commit murder.Following a jury trial, the defendants were convicted on both counts.The trial court dismissed the conspiracy charges, and, following a sentencing hearing, sentenced Charles Thompson to life without parole and sentenced Verico Jackson to life.On appeal, both defendants claim (1) that the evidence was insufficient to sustain the verdicts; (2) that the trial court should have severed the defendants' trials; (3) that the trial court erred by shackling defense witnesses and/or providing extra security in the courtroom; (4) that the trial court erroneously excluded the victim's "dying declaration"; (5) that the trial court erroneously excluded evidence that people other than the defendants had recently threatened the victim; and (6) that the trial court erroneously overruled a motion for mistrial after a witness testified that Defendant Thompson had previously ordered other murders.Additionally, Defendant Thompson claims (1) that the trial court erroneously allowed the state to use exhibits that had been used in a previous trial of a codefendant; (2) that the trial court erroneously overruled a motion for mistrial after an attorney mentioned the trial of a codefendant in violation of a court order; (3) that Defendant Jackson's attorney had a conflict of interest that prejudiced Defendant Thompson; (4) that the trial court erroneously excluded the prior inconsistent statements of a witness; (5) that the trial court erroneously excluded evidence of a witness's reputation for truthfulness; (6) that the trial court erroneously denied Defendant Thompson's request for a special jury instruction; and (7) that, at sentencing, the trial court erroneously allowed the state to introduce prejudicial evidence of prior bad acts.

Finding no reversible error, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Tenn. R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Criminal Court is Affirmed.

Jerry L. Smith, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which James Curwood Witt, Jr. and Robert W. Wedemeyer, JJ, joined.

Paula Skahan and Gerald Skahan, Memphis, Tennessee, for appellant, Charles Thompson

James Ball and Joseph Ozment, Memphis, Tennessee, for appellant, Verico Jackson.

Paul G. Summers, Attorney General & Reporter; J. Ross Dyer, Assistant Attorney General; William L. Gibbons, District Attorney General; Jerry Harris; Jerry Kitchen, Assistant District Attorneys; for appellee, State of Tennessee.

OPINION

Factual Background

In 1996, Charles Thompson and Verico Jackson were both high-ranking members of a gang called the "Traveling Vice Lords."On April 19, 1996, Charles Thompson was incarcerated in the Shelby County Justice Center where he had a verbal altercation with a Sergeant Dedrick Taylor, a Justice Center employee.Following that altercation, Charles Thompson telephoned Verico Jackson at a local apartment and told Jackson that he wanted Sergeant Taylor killed and that he wanted to see news of the killing on television the next morning.Jackson then related that conversation to other members of the gang who were present in the apartment.Jackson and the other members of the gang armed themselves and left the apartment.They walked toward the street on which Sergeant Taylor and his wife lived.Jackson then told the other gang members to kill Sergeant Taylor.Shortly thereafter Sergeant Taylor pulled into his driveway where he was shot several times.His wife heard gunshots, but did not see who shot Sergeant Taylor.Sergeant Taylor died from the gunshot wounds.

Margaretta Dotson, a woman who was with the gang members earlier in the evening, heard gunshots coming from the area of Sergeant Taylor's house.Immediately after hearing the shots, she saw all of the gang members run and jump into a car and drive away.She then returned to the apartment that Charles Thompson had phoned earlier; there she found Jackson and the other gang members.They all watched the local news, and saw a report about the shooting of Sergeant Taylor.When the news report aired, Jackson and the other gang members celebrated and made "gang-signs" to one another.

The defendants were charged with first-degree murder and conspiracy to commit first-degree murder.Following a jury trial, both defendants were convicted on both counts.The court dismissed the conspiracy charges on double jeopardy grounds.After a sentencing hearing, Defendant Thompson was sentenced to life without the possibility of parole and Defendant Jackson was sentenced to life.

SufficiencyFirst, both appellants claim that the evidence was insufficient to support their convictions.When an appellant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence, this court is obliged to review that challenge according to certain well-settled principles.A verdict of guilty by the jury, approved by the trial judge, accredits the testimony of the State's witnesses and resolves all conflicts in the testimony in favor of the State.State v. Cazes, 875 S.W.2d 253, 259(Tenn.1994).Although an accused is originally cloaked with a presumption of innocence, a jury verdict removes this presumption and replaces it with one of guilt.State v. Tuggle, 639 S.W.2d 913, 914(Tenn.1982).Hence, on appeal, the burden of proof rests with the appellant to demonstrate the insufficiency of the convicting evidence.Id.

On appeal, the state is entitled to the strongest legitimate view of the evidence as well as all reasonable and legitimate inferences that may be drawn therefrom.State v. Cabbage, 571 S.W.2d 832, 835(Tenn.1978).Where the sufficiency of the evidence is contested, the relevant question for the reviewing court is whether any rational trier of fact could have found the accused guilty of every element of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt.State v. Harris, 839 S.W.2d 54, 75(Tenn.1992);Tenn. R. App. P. 13(e).In conducting our evaluation of the convicting evidence, this Court is precluded from reweighing or reconsidering the evidence.State v. Morgan, 929 S.W.2d 380, 383(Tenn. Crim. App.1996).Moreover, this Court may not substitute its own inferences "for those drawn by the trier of fact from circumstantial evidence."State v. Matthews, 805 S.W.2d 776, 779(Tenn. Crim. App.1990).

In this case, the defendants were found guilty of being criminally responsible for the first-degree murder of Dedrick Taylor."A person is criminally responsible for an offense committed by the conduct of another if . . . [a]cting with intent to promote or assist the commission of the offense, or to benefit in the proceeds or results of the offense, the person solicits, directs, aids, or attempts to aid another person to commit the offense."Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-11-402(2).First degree murder is "[a] premeditated and intentional killing of another."Tenn. Code. Ann. § 39-13-202(a)(1).

The evidence in this case was sufficient to support an inference that Charles Thompson ordered Verico Jackson to kill Sergeant Taylor and that Verico Jackson carried out that order through subordinate members of the Traveling Vice Lords.Charles Taylor, an inmate, testified that Sergeant Taylor and Charles Thompson had a verbal altercation.He further testified that he heard Thompson telephone someone and ask for Verico Jackson.Mr. Taylor overheard Charles Thompson say that he wanted Sergeant Taylor killed and that he(Charles Thompson) wanted to see evidence of the killing on the news the next morning.Margaretta Dotson testified that she was visiting an apartment where Verico Jackson was on April 19, 1996 and that Jackson got a phone call between 7:00 and 7:30 that evening.Jackson took the phone in another room to take the call.After Jackson got off the phone, he and several other gang members in the apartment began loading weapons.Robert Meyer, a specialist in charge of the inmate telephone system, testified that a phone call was made from prison "pod" 4-f to the apartment in question at 7:32 p.m. Charles Golden, a member of the Traveling Vice Lords, testified that he was at the apartment with Jackson the night of the crime.He said that Jackson told him (Golden) about the altercation between Thompson and the victim and that "no one could do that to his chief."Golden said that when the other gang members said that they should kill the victim, Jackson replied "[T]hat's what we gonna do."Golden, Jackson, and two other men walked to a local night club nearby.Jackson stayed in the club, while Golden and the two other men found and fatally shot Sergeant Taylor.Mr. Golden testified that he shot a .38 caliber that night.Alphonso Fleming testified that, approximately April 25th or 26th, Charles Golden asked him to hold a .38 caliber gun.Mr. Fleming hid the gun in a closet until police came and confiscated it.Tommy Heflin, a TBI firearms identification expert, testified that all nineteen shell casings recovered at the scene of the murder were fired from the weapon discovered in Mr. Fleming's closet and that several bullet fragments could have been fired from that gun.Finally, Marcus Daniels, another gang member, testified that Charles Thompson was a ruling member of the gang, and that others had to abide by his orders.The evidence was clearly sufficient to support the jury's verdict.

Jackson also claims, however, that the evidence was insufficient because all of the evidence against Jackson was uncorroborated accomplice testimony.Specifically, he claims that Charles Golden and Charles Taylor were both accomplices and that neither's testimony was...