Opinion ID: 1897263
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Testimony at Issue

Text: The State's second witness at trial was probation and parole officer, Georgiana Staley. Her testimony regarding the initial confrontation with Jackson was as follows: Q. What happened next when you were following this vehicle? A. . . . . We pulled up next to him. He attempted to exit the truck. I got out of the vehicle and announced who I was, told him I needed to [] see his hands. He is known to carry weapons. In fact, there is a flag when you pull up his sheet that [he] may be armed and dangerous. So I insisted that I see his hands. I pulled my weapon. He got back in the vehicle. There was no objection to this testimony. The trial judge did not intervene sua sponte. The prosecutor did not pursue the matter at that time. The record reflects no further reference during trial to Jackson's reputation for being armed and dangerous. For the first time on appeal, Jackson argues that he was so prejudiced by Staley's testimony that, notwithstanding his failure to make an objection, that testimony constituted plain and reversible error. Under the plain error standard of review, the error complained of must be so clearly prejudicial to substantial rights as to jeopardize the fairness and integrity of the trial process. Furthermore, the doctrine of plain error is limited to material defects which are apparent on the face of the record; which are basic, serious and fundamental in their character, and which clearly deprive an accused of a substantial right, or which clearly show manifest injustice. [2]