State v. Jackson
2000 WL 1021475, 767 So.2d 848 (2000)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Charging a defendant with multiple counts of armed robbery for taking property from multiple victims during a single criminal transaction does not violate the constitutional protection against double jeopardy. Under Louisiana law, each victim of a robbery constitutes a separate and distinct offense.
Facts:
- On the night of October 9, 1998, a card game with twelve to fourteen women was held at the apartment of Kayyonna Hayes, who was Graylyn Jackson's girlfriend.
- Two men, Travis Frank and Colin Duhe, entered the apartment wearing disguises, pointed handguns at the women, and demanded money.
- The gunmen took money and jewelry from several of the women present at the card game.
- One of the women, Carla Allen, refused to give the gunmen her money when they demanded it.
- After the robbery, Frank and Duhe fled the scene and were seen by a victim, Erica Hill, getting into a car owned by Hayes.
- Graylyn Jackson was identified as the driver of the getaway car.
- Jackson, Duhe, Frank, and a fourth man later split the cash stolen from the victims.
- Co-defendants Duhe and Frank later stated to police that Jackson had planned the robbery and supplied the weapons.
Procedural Posture:
- The State charged Graylyn Jackson in the Twenty-Ninth Judicial District Court with thirteen counts of armed robbery.
- Prior to trial, the State dismissed five counts, leaving eight counts of armed robbery remaining.
- Following a trial, a twelve-person jury returned a verdict finding Jackson guilty as charged on all eight counts.
- The trial court sentenced Jackson to 49 years at hard labor on each count, to be served concurrently.
- The State then filed a habitual offender bill of information, alleging Jackson was a second felony offender.
- After a hearing, the trial court found Jackson to be a second felony offender, vacated the original sentences, and imposed enhanced sentences of 65 years on each count, to be served concurrently.
- Jackson, as appellant, filed a motion for appeal to the Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fifth Circuit, which was granted.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does charging and convicting a defendant for multiple counts of armed robbery, where each count corresponds to a different victim robbed during a single continuous event, violate the constitutional protection against double jeopardy?
Opinions:
Majority - Edwards, J.
No, charging a defendant with multiple counts of armed robbery for each victim in a single incident does not violate double jeopardy. Louisiana courts apply the 'same evidence' test, not a 'same transaction' test, to evaluate double jeopardy claims. The armed robbery statute, LSA-R.S. 14:64, defines the crime as a taking 'from the person of another,' which makes the individual victim a core element of the offense. Because each count of robbery alleged a taking from a different individual, each count required different evidence to prove the crime (i.e., proof of a taking from that specific person). Therefore, the offenses were separate and distinct, and prosecuting Jackson for each one did not subject him to double jeopardy.
Analysis:
This decision reaffirms Louisiana's adherence to the 'same evidence' test for double jeopardy, rejecting the broader 'same transaction' test. It establishes that for crimes against persons, like robbery, the unit of prosecution is the individual victim, not the criminal episode as a whole. This precedent allows prosecutors to charge defendants with a separate count for each person victimized in a single event, significantly increasing a defendant's potential criminal liability and sentence length. The ruling provides clarity for multi-victim crimes, ensuring that the harm done to each individual can be independently prosecuted.
