549 S.W.3d 356
Ark.2018Background
- Michael Dashun Jackson was convicted of capital murder, attempted capital murder, and aggravated robbery with a firearm enhancement and sentenced to life without parole; this court affirmed his convictions on direct appeal.
- Jackson sought permission to file a writ of error coram nobis based on alleged Brady violations by the prosecution.
- He alleged three withheld items: (1) that detective Dane Pedersen coerced witness Tina Jefferson into incriminating Jackson; (2) that a second videotaped pretrial statement by codefendant Cherick Coleman was withheld (and that promises were made to Coleman); and (3) that a third party, Charles Bullock, was arrested with the victim’s gun but this was not disclosed.
- Coram nobis is an extraordinary post-appeal remedy available only with this court’s permission and requires proof of a fundamental factual error extrinsic to the trial record (including certain Brady-type claims).
- The appellate record showed the defense knew of Jefferson’s allegations of coercion, contested the existence/content of Coleman’s interview at trial, and was aware of the recovery of the victim’s gun and Bullock as a state witness.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Authority to file coram nobis post-appeal | Jackson sought leave to proceed in trial court for coram nobis review | State: leave required and coram nobis is narrowly available | Court denied leave; coram nobis is extraordinary and requires showing extrinsic facts |
| Coerced testimony (Jefferson) | Jefferson was coerced by detective Pedersen; coercion withheld by prosecution | Defense actually knew of the coercion allegations and cross-examined Jefferson at trial | No Brady/coram nobis relief—allegations were not extrinsic; defense had the information |
| Undisclosed Coleman videotape / promises | A second videotaped interview (and promises to Coleman) existed and was not disclosed; would be impeaching/exculpatory | Existence/content of the interview and promises were contested/addressed at trial; petitioner gives no proof a second tape existed or its contents | No relief—petitioner failed to show suppressed material or describe exculpatory content; matters were before the jury |
| Withheld evidence re: Bullock and victim’s gun | Bullock had the victim’s gun and was true perpetrator; this was withheld | Trial record disclosed recovery of gun in unrelated stop and listed Bullock as a State witness; defense knew of circumstances | No Brady/coram nobis relief—information was in the record and known to defense |
Key Cases Cited
- Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) (prosecution must disclose materially exculpatory or impeaching evidence)
- Strickler v. Greene, 527 U.S. 263 (1999) (elements of a Brady violation)
- Roberts v. State, 425 S.W.3d 771 (Ark. 2013) (coram nobis available only with permission and for extrinsic fundamental facts)
- Jackson v. State, 429 S.W.3d 176 (Ark. 2011) (direct-appeal affirmation of convictions)
- Carner v. State, 535 S.W.3d 634 (Ark. 2018) (Brady analysis and burden on petitioner)