Johnson v. State
| Docket Number: | 2012-KA-00363-COA Linked Case(s): 2012-TS-00363-COA ; 2012-KA-00363-COA ; 2012-CT-00363-SCT |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 10-27-2015 Opinion Author: Barnes, J. Holding: Affirmed. |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Kidnapping & Murder - Ineffective assistance of counsel - M.R.A.P. 22(b) - Dismissal of jurors - Section 13-5-67 Judge(s) Concurring: Lee, C.J., Irving and Griffis, P.JJ., Ishee, Carlton, Maxwell, Fair and Wilson, JJ., Concur. James, J., Concurs in Part Without Separate Written Opinion. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 11-05-2007 Appealed from: BOLIVAR COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT Judge: KENNETH L. THOMAS Disposition: Convicted of kidnapping and murder District Attorney: Brenda Fay Mitchell Case Number: 2006-002-CR1 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | Dexter Johnson |
JOHN M. COLETTE, SHERWOOD ALEXANDER COLETTE |
|
|
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: LAURA HOGAN TEDDER |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Kidnapping & Murder - Ineffective assistance of counsel - M.R.A.P. 22(b) - Dismissal of jurors - Section 13-5-67 |
| Summary of the Facts: | Dexter Johnson was convicted of kidnapping and murder. He was sentenced to thirty years for kidnapping and life without parole for murder. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Ineffective assistance of counsel Johnson argues that he was denied effective assistance of counsel due to defense counsel’s decision not to challenge the admissibility of his taped confession through a motion to suppress, and his failure to move for a mistrial after the dismissal of two jurors. Under M.R.A.P. 22(b), a claim for ineffective assistance of counsel may be brought on direct appeal “if such issues are based on facts fully apparent from the record.” Because all of Johnson’s claims are confined to the record and can be found within the trial transcript, the Court will consider his claim. It is evident from the record that defense counsel’s decision not to contest the admissibility of the statement was within the ambit of trial strategy and, therefore, does not give rise to a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. Johnson has also failed to establish that if defense counsel had not withdrawn the motion from consideration, Johnson’s statement would have been suppressed by the trial court. In addition, Johnson has failed to show he suffered any prejudice from the court’s dismissal of the jurors and, had counsel moved for a mistrial after the dismissal of the two jurors, the result of the proceedings would have been different. Issue 2: Dismissal of jurors Johnson argues the trial court abused its discretion in dismissing two jurors during the trial. One juror was replaced with an alternate after she failed to show up for trial on the second day. The other juror was dismissed after the State saw him acknowledging a member of the defendant’s family on his way out of the court room. Section 13-5-67 provides that “[a]lternate jurors in the order in which they are called shall replace jurors who, prior to the time the jury retires to consider its verdict, become unable or disqualified to perform their duties.” With regard to the first juror, the court was well within its discretion to dismiss her, as she failed to appear for trial and was out of town. In addition, the court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the other juror. The trial judge found the juror’s replies to the court’s questions “at least gave credence, verification[,] or affirmation” to the State’s assertion that he smiled and brushed arms with the individual in the courtroom. In addition, Johnson made no attempt to show any actual prejudice suffered by the dismissal of the jurors. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
