Jefferson v. State
2017 Ark. App. 492
| Ark. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- On June 20, 2015, police responded to a 911 call from an apartment where Jolanda Young lived with her children TY (5) and SY (8); officers observed a forced/broken front door, TY with extensive welts and lash marks, and blood on Jolanda’s shirt.
- Trenton Lamont Jefferson (the children’s father) was charged with residential burglary and second-degree domestic battering; an amended information added a sentencing enhancement for committing domestic battering in the presence of a child.
- At trial neighbors and officers testified about hearing a prolonged beating and seeing/photographing TY’s injuries; Jolanda testified she had invited Jefferson that day and permitted discipline but admitted TY’s injuries occurred after Jefferson’s conduct.
- A jury convicted Jefferson of residential burglary and second-degree domestic battering and found the battering occurred in the presence of a child; total sentence 216 months (consecutive sentences plus a 36-month enhancement).
- Jefferson appealed, raising (1) insufficiency of evidence, (2) denial of a new-trial motion based on ineffective assistance at sentencing, (3) erroneous admission of hearsay under the excited-utterance exception, and (4) improper restriction of closing argument about racial/cultural perspective.
- The appellate court affirmed on all points, finding substantial evidence supported the convictions and enhancement, no Strickland prejudice at sentencing, no abuse of discretion admitting the excited utterance, and no manifest abuse in limiting the challenged closing argument.
Issues
| Issue | Jefferson's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for residential burglary | Entry was lawful; he had permission to be there and to discipline TY | Door damage, neighbor testimony, officers’ observations supported unlawful entry and intent | Affirmed; substantial evidence supported unlawful entry and intent to commit an offense inside |
| Sufficiency for second-degree domestic battering | Force was reasonable parental corporal punishment | Photographs, welts, duration and severity showed physical injury beyond reasonable discipline | Affirmed; substantial evidence of physical injury and unreasonable force |
| Sufficiency for enhancement (in presence of a child) | No proof SY was present or that Jefferson knew she could hear/see | SY was shaken and said she was not okay; jury could infer she heard event and Jefferson knew child lived there | Affirmed; substantial evidence supported finding the battering occurred in the presence of a child |
| Denial of new-trial motion (ineffective assistance at sentencing) | Trial counsel failed to investigate/present mitigation; counsel didn’t contact witnesses | Jury already imposed sentences well below statutory maxima; defendant showed no prejudice under Strickland | Affirmed; no Strickland prejudice shown because sentences were below maximum and no evidence outcome would differ |
| Admission of Jolanda’s identification as excited utterance | Statement made after lapse/time and in response to questioning; not spontaneous | Officer arrived within minutes; declarant still under stress; statement trustworthy as excited utterance | Affirmed; trial court didn’t abuse discretion admitting the statement |
| Limitation on closing argument re: racial/cultural perspective | Counsel sought to explain "black perspective" to jurors; restriction infringed defense | Court has discretion to control closing; cultural argument not material to statutory elements of offense | Affirmed; no manifest abuse of discretion in limiting that line of argument |
Key Cases Cited
- Ackers v. State, 73 Ark. 262, 83 S.W. 909 (early Arkansas precedent recognizing parental corporal punishment may be lawful)
- Dodd v. State, 94 Ark. 297, 126 S.W. 834 (parental/teacher corporal punishment not excessive where no evidence of malice)
- Arkansas Dept. of Human Servs. v. Parker, 88 Ark. App. 222, 197 S.W.3d 33 (discipline producing limited bruising insufficient for abuse finding)
- Arkansas Dept. of Human Servs. v. Holman, 96 Ark. App. 243, 240 S.W.3d 618 (insufficient evidence of child maltreatment where discipline produced limited injury)
- Sykes v. State, 57 Ark. App. 5, 940 S.W.2d 888 (reversal where spanking produced only minor marks and no bruising)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (ineffective-assistance two-prong test)
- Wiggins v. Smith, 539 U.S. 510 (counsel’s duty to investigate mitigating evidence at sentencing)
- Fudge v. State, 341 Ark. 759, 20 S.W.3d 315 (standards for excited-utterance exception)
- Peterson v. State, 349 Ark. 195, 76 S.W.3d 845 (requirement that event excite declarant for exception to apply)
- State v. Smith, 368 Ark. 620, 249 S.W.3d 119 (sentences below maximum do not alone show prejudice at sentencing)