Background
Jerry Jackson was retried after the Louisiana Second Circuit previously reversed his convictions for manslaughter and second degree murder because the original jury verdict was nonunanimous. At the retrial, a unanimous jury found Jackson guilty of manslaughter in Kendrick Brown’s death and second degree murder in Michael Dillard’s death.
The evidence showed that, after an argument with Brown at the home Jackson shared with Brown’s mother, Brown returned with Dillard. Witnesses testified that Jackson retrieved a firearm, shot both men with a .22-caliber rifle, and later placed a handgun near Brown’s body. Ballistics linked shell casings found at the scene to the rifle. The trial court imposed 40 years at hard labor for manslaughter and life without benefits for second degree murder, to run consecutively.
The Court’s Holding
The court affirmed both convictions and sentences after reviewing the record under Anders v. California. Appellate counsel identified no nonfrivolous issue and moved to withdraw; Jackson did not file a pro se brief, and the State declined to respond.
The court found no patent error or procedural defect affecting Jackson’s right to appeal. It concluded that the indictment was proper, the amended manslaughter charge appropriately reflected double-jeopardy concerns, the verdicts were unanimous, and the sentences were lawful. Although the trial judge did not orally state that the murder sentence was at hard labor, the minutes and commitment order correctly included that requirement, so no sentencing correction was necessary. The court granted counsel’s motion to withdraw.
Key Takeaways
- An Anders review found no nonfrivolous appellate issue and no patent error.
- The retrial’s unanimous verdicts cured the defect that required reversal of Jackson’s earlier nonunanimous convictions.
- A sentencing omission in the oral pronouncement did not require correction where the minutes and commitment order correctly stated that the life sentence was at hard labor.
Why It Matters
The decision illustrates the Second Circuit’s review of an Anders appeal after a retrial prompted by Ramos v. Louisiana. It also confirms that a clerical discrepancy between an oral sentence and the written sentencing record will not necessarily warrant appellate relief when the written record accurately reflects the mandatory sentence.