Jackson v. State

1

ANT HONY MAURICE JACKSON, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

No. 09-21-00141-CR

Court of Appeals of Texas, Ninth District, Beaumont

November 2, 2022

Do Not Publish

Submitted on August 9, 2022.

On Appeal from the 9th District Court Montgomery County, Texas Trial Cause No. 17-11-13621-CR.

Before Golemon, C.J., Horton and Johnson, JJ.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

W SCOTT GOLEMON, Chief Justice.

A jury convicted Anthony Maurice Jackson of injuring a child A.T.^[1] See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 22.04(a). After he pled "true" to two enhancements for prior felony convictions, the jury assessed punishment at sixty-five years of incarceration. During trial, Jackson represented himself. Jackson appeals his conviction and in five issues challenges 1) the denial of his motion to suppress, 2) the sufficiency of the evidence, 3) the trial court's denial of his motion for continuance, 4) the trial court's denial of his motion for additional funds to pay an investigator, and 5) the trial court's denial of his motion for mistrial. For the following reasons, we will affirm the trial court's judgment.

Background

In March 2016, Jackson's fourteen-year-old daughter, A.T., was placed in his care. A.T. was intellectually disabled, autistic, had difficulty communicating, suffered from violent outbursts, and regularly attacked others around her. Witnesses who testified at trial estimated she operated at the level of a kindergartner or first grader. CPS had been involved with A.T., and CPS witnesses explained that she needed an intense level of care due to her behavior towards herself and others.

On October 15, 2016, A.T. collapsed at home, was unresponsive, and attempts to revive her were unsuccessful. The Montgomery County Precinct 3 Constable's Office responded to the scene, and the Montgomery County Sheriff's Office (MCSO) began an investigation into A.T.'s death. During the investigation, detectives uncovered evidence that Jackson used a stun gun on A.T. and ultimately charged him with injury to a child.

Relevant Trial Evidence

Guilt/Innocence^[2]

DVR surveillance footage admitted at trial showed Jackson repeatedly activating a stun gun as indicated by a red light, contacting A.T. with it, and A.T. jerking from the stun gun. Detective Chris Evans testified at trial they never located the actual stun gun Jackson used in the videos, but they found a box with a brand name and model number and purchased an identical stun gun to operate in front of the jury.

A.T.'s bus driver, Janet Wells, testified at trial and described an incident where A.T. tried to pinch another student on the bus, and the other student told A.T. he was going to tell her father. A.T. responded by drawing back, making a noise that sounded like she was being shocked, and told him that "shocking hurt like hell." Wells reported this incident to CPS, because she was concerned that Jackson was using a stun gun on A.T. Wells explained that she heard A.T. say similar things on prior occasions. The thing that was different the day that Wells reported it to CPS was the sound A.T. made of something shocking her, which concerned Wells. Jackson admitted two bus driving incident reports into evidence that Wells prepared in July 2016. These reports noted A.T.'s statements that "Anthony shocked the hell out of me[,]" "shocking hurts[,]" and "shocking [sic] hot."

Dr. Pinneri, the forensic pathologist who performed an autopsy on A.T., testified that based on her review of the videos she would not expect the stun gun shocks to leave any marks. She described seeing A.T.'s arm jerk away from the stun gun caused by the electrical charge making the muscle contract. Dr. Pinneri testified that what she saw in the videos was consistent with an electrical shock being administered. Dr. Pinneri testified that A.T.'s reactions in the videos indicate she experienced pain, and "shocking hurts."

Detective Evans testified that the stun gun could cause localized pain when it contacted the skin but would not leave lasting injuries or marks. Evans testified they pulled videos contained within a download pursuant to the search warrant, and they have not been changed or altered in any way. While the DVR surveillance videos were played for the jury, Evans described some of the things he observed. Evans described instances where A.T.'s body reacts to the shock by flinching, and that her face appeared to "express pain" in response to the shock. Evans testified there were several occasions in the videos that he was positive that A.T. was shocked, and it caused pain. Evans testified that based on everything he reviewed, the original offense reports, CPS intake reports, interviews, photos, and videos, he believed the offense of injury to a child was committed.

Jerry Staton, a Taser and stun gun expert, testified for Jackson. Staton testified that touch stun guns hurt, so people move dramatically away from contact, and you often cannot see a mark. He disagreed with the State's witness who said by looking at the videos they were certain a shock was administered, but he noted it would help if the videos had sound. Staton explained that to determine whether someone was shocked, you needed to look for violent movement away from the device. Staton also testified that stun guns are meant for pain compliance, "they hurt[,]" and that is "the intent." Staton told the jury you could feel pain without seeing any injury. Staton agreed that even though the stun gun's effectiveness is reduced as the battery goes down, if the arc occurs and contacts someone's body, it will cause some level of discomfort.

Dr. Matthew Brams, a board certified psychiatrist, also testified as an expert for the defense. He explained that "[a]versive conditioning" was a way to stop unwanted behaviors by bringing in a "noxious stimulus, something that is not pleasant." Dr. Brams testified that institutions handling disruptive behaviors and intellectually disabled patients use aversive conditioning, and aversive shock therapy was approved by the FDA and American Association of Behavioral Therapists as safe and effective until 2020, but it is no longer approved. Dr. Brams testified that when A.T. was alive, several centers used it. He explained it was for people having self-injurious behavior and aggression. He opined that in very severe cases, it can be very safe and effective. Dr. Brams testified that after watching the video, he would say A.T. had not been shocked; it came close and was scary to her, but that is the goal of aversive conditioning. The jury found Jackson guilty of injury to a child as charged in the indictment.

Punishment

The State included two enhancement paragraphs, which increased the punishment range from a minimum of twenty-five years to a maximum of ninety-nine years. Jackson pled "true" to these enhancements, and the jury was instructed to find the enhancements "true" given Jackson's plea. During punishment, copies of prior judgments of Jackson's felony convictions were admitted, and an expert confirmed the fingerprints matched. The jury sentenced Jackson to sixty-five years of confinement.

Procedural Posture

Case Chronology and Attorney Representation

In January 2018, a Montgomery County grand jury indicted Jackson for injury to a child. Trial began in May 2021, more than three years later. During that time, Jackson had five different attorneys represent him, one retained, and the rest appointed. Jackson's retained attorney was the fourth attorney on the case and withdrew in early 2019. The trial court appointed a fifth attorney shortly thereafter, who acted as standby counsel at trial.

The trial court's docket sheet reflects that on April 8, 2021, Jackson asked to represent himself, the trial court held a Faretta hearing, and the trial court allowed him to proceed pro se.^[3] On April 26, 2021, Jackson filed his Motion for Continuance, unsupported by an affidavit and asked the trial court to move the case from May 2021 to August 2021. The trial court denied this continuance, and Jackson re-urged the motion following voir dire. He complained that he did not have time to prepare, and he lacked an investigator.

The morning trial began and after voir dire, Jackson provided an affidavit from an investigator hired by his former retained attorney, who outlined what had not been done in the case. The investigator's affidavit indicated he prepared a report in 2019 while working for the retained attorney, then provided a copy to appointed counsel along with a list of current discovery after the retained attorney withdrew. The investigator estimated there were twenty witnesses who had not been subpoenaed. Jackson made these same representations in his Motion for Continuance and argued that standby counsel did not utilize the investigator or pursue the same defensive theory the retained attorney did, and he had to start over.

The trial court responded, I will note for the record that this case has been pending for over three years, that you've had multiple attorneys during that time. You have a court appointed lawyer that is now your standby attorney that was on this case for two years. I've approved thousands of dollars of expert witness money, thousands of dollars of investigative money. And you made the decision to represent yourself recently, aware - very aware that we had a trial date. So, you know, you made that choice. And I warned you and cautioned you when you made the decision to represent yourself that you need to be aware of the consequences of that.

The trial court denied Jackson's re-urged Motion for Continuance. The record also reflects Jackson filed a pro se Motion for Independent Taser Expert, which the trial court granted over a week before trial and approved an additional $4,000.

...