State of Louisiana v. Carl Alexander Jackson

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

STATE OF LOUISIANA

COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT

KA 08-1356

STATE OF LOUISIANA

VERSUS

CARL ALEXANDER JACKSON

****************

APPEAL FROM THE
FOURTEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT
PARISH OF CALCASIEU, NO. 13,996-07
HONORABLE DAVID A. RITCHIE, JUDGE

****************

JIMMIE C. PETERS
JUDGE

****************

Court composed of Oswald A. Decuir, Jimmie C. Peters, and Shannon J. Gremillion,
Judges.

CONVICTION AND SENTENCE AFFIRMED; MOTION
TO WITHDRAW GRANTED.

John F. DeRosier
District Attorney - Fourteenth JDC
David Palay
Assistant District Attorney

Carla S. Sigler
Assistant District Attorney
1020 Ryan Street
Lake Charles, LA 70601
(337) 437-3400
COUNSEL FOR APPELLEE:
State of Louisiana

Mark O. Foster
Louisiana Appellate Project
P.O. Box 2057
Natchitoches, LA 71457
(318) 572-5693
COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT/APPELLANT:
Carl Alexander Jackson

PETERS, J.

The defendant, Carl Alexander Jackson, pled guilty as charged to the offense

of distribution of cocaine, a violation of La.R.S. 40:967(A). Thereafter, the trial court

sentenced him to serve five years at hard labor, with the first two years of the

sentence to be without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence. The

trial court ordered that the sentence run concurrently with sentences the defendant

was serving on two other convictions.

In this appeal, counsel for the defendant has filed a motion to withdraw

together with a brief asserting that after review of the trial court record, he found no

non-frivolous errors subject to review on appeal. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S.

738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967), and State v. Benjamin, 573 So.2d 528 (La.App. 4 Cir.

1990). This court notified the defendant of his counsel’s request to withdraw and

advised him of the time limit for notifying this court of his intention to file a brief.

The defendant did not timely respond to that notification.

OPINION

Little is said on the record concerning the underlying facts giving rise to this

criminal charge. In fact, the record of the plea and sentencing hearing reflects little

more than the fact that the defendant had distributed cocaine on May 27, 2005. What

is clear, however, is that the defendant’s plea resulted from a plea agreement with the

State of Louisiana (state) wherein the state agreed not to pursue other pending

charges in exchange for the defendant’s plea. Additionally, although it was not made

a part of the plea agreement, the state recommended the sentence ultimately imposed

by the trial court.

In Benjamin, 573 So.2d at 531, the fourth circuit explained the Anders analysis:

When appointed counsel has filed a brief indicating that no non-
frivolous issues and no ruling arguably supporting an appeal were found
after a conscientious review of the record, Anders requires that counsel
move to withdraw. This motion will not be acted on until this court
performs a thorough independent review of the record after providing
the appellant an opportunity to file a brief in his or her own behalf. This
court’s review of the record will consist of (1) a review of the bill of
information or indictment to insure the defendant was properly charged;
(2) a review of all minute entries to insure the defendant was present at
all crucial stages of the proceedings, the jury composition and verdict
were correct and the sentence is legal; (3) a review of all pleadings in
the record; (4) a review of the jury sheets; and (5) a review of all
transcripts to determine if any ruling provides an arguable basis for
appeal.

Pursuant to Anders and Benjamin, we have performed a thorough review of the

record, including the pleadings, the minute entries, the charging instrument, and the

transcripts. The defendant was properly charged in an indictment and was present,

either in person or by simultaneous audio-visual transmission, and represented by

counsel at all crucial stages of the proceedings. He entered a free and voluntary

guilty plea after properly being advised of his rights in accordance with Boykin v.

Alabama, 395 U.S. 238, 89 S.Ct. 1709 (1969).

The defendant received a legal sentence for the offense to which he pled guilty

as the incarceration sentencing range for distribution of cocaine is imprisonment at

hard labor for two to thirty years, with the first two years being without benefit of

parole, probation, or suspension of sentence. La.R.S. 40:967(B)(4)(b). Thus, the

sentence is in the lower range for the offense charged, and the record suggests that

the defendant is a third-felony offender. Additionally, the defendant has the benefit

of the sentence running concurrently with two other charges. Absent an abuse of

discretion, this court will not find a sentence excessive when it falls within statutory

limits. State v. Semien, 06-841 (La.App. 3 Cir. 1/31/07), 948 So.2d 1189, writ

2

denied, 07-448 (La. 10/12/07), 965 So.2d 397. We find no abuse of discretion in the

imposition of this sentence.

In accordance with La.Code Crim.P. art. 920, we have also reviewed this

appeal for errors patent on the face of the record, but find none. Our review of the

record has revealed that there are no issues which would support an assignment of

error on appeal. Accordingly, the defendant’s conviction and sentence are affirmed,

and appellate defense counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted.

DISPOSITION

For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the defendant’s conviction and sentence

in all respects and grant his counsel’s motion to withdraw.

CONVICTION AND SENTENCE AFFIRMED; MOTION TO
WITHDRAW GRANTED.

This opinion is NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION. Rule 2-16.3, Uniform
Rules, Courts of Appeal.

3

KA08-1356

COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT

STATE OF LOUISIANA

STATE OF LOUISIANA

Appellee

VERSUS

CARL ALEXANDER JACKSON

Defendant-Appellant

On Appeal from the Fourteenth Judicial District Court, Docket Number 13996-07,
Parish of Calcasieu, State of Louisiana, Honorable David Alexander Ritchie, Judge.

ORDER

After consideration of appellate counsel’s request to withdraw as counsel and
the appeal presently pending in the above-captioned matter,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that appellate counsel’s motion to withdraw is
granted. Appellant’s conviction and sentence are affirmed.

THUS DONE AND SIGNED this _____ day of _________________, 2009.

_______________________________
Judge Oswald A. Decuir

_______________________________
Judge Jimmie C. Peters

_______________________________
Judge Shannon J. Gremillion