Jackson v. State

A witness's testimony that he recognized defendant from an excerpt of the crime-scene surveillance video shown on TV was relevant and admissible to explain how police located defendant as a suspect.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

A Chatham County jury found Solomon Jackson guilty of armed robbery, OCGA § 16-8-41, aggravated assault, OCGA § 16-5-21, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony, OCGA § 16-11-106. Jackson appeals from the denial of his motion for new trial, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence, the voluntariness of his custodial statement, the effectiveness of his trial counsel, and the admission of certain evidence. Finding no error, we affirm. 1. When a criminal defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his or her conviction, “the relevant question is whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.” Citation omitted; emphasis in original. Jackson v. Virginia , 443 U. S. 307, 318-319 III B 99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560 1979. The jury, not this Court, resolves conflicts in the testimony, weighs the evidence, and draws reasonable inferences from basic facts to ultimate facts. Id. “As long as there is some competent evidence, even though contradicted, to support each fact necessary to make out the State’s case, the jury’s verdict will be upheld.” Citation and punctuation omitted. Miller v. State , 273 Ga. 831, 832 546 SE2d 524 2001. Viewed in this light, the record reveals the following facts.

On the night of March 17, 1997, Jackson and two masked accomplices entered a convenience store in Savannah, Georgia. Jackson, who was not masked, held a chrome revolver in his left hand, pointed it at the store’s two clerks, and demanded money from the registers. Jackson and his accomplices took about $1,200 and fled on foot down a side alley, leaving a trail of dropped cash. A witness pursued the robbers briefly, but stopped when Jackson turned and shot at him.

Jackson v. State

A witness's testimony that he recognized defendant from an excerpt of the crime-scene surveillance video shown on TV was relevant and admissible to explain how police located defendant as a suspect.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report