Johnson v. State


<- Return to Search Results


Docket Number: 2009-CA-01776-COA
Linked Case(s): 2009-CA-01776-COA ; 2009-CT-01776-SCT

Court of Appeals: Opinion Link
Opinion Date: 03-29-2011
Opinion Author: Lee, C.J.
Holding: Affirmed.

Additional Case Information: Topic: Post-conviction relief - Recanted testimonies - Motion to recuse - Section 99-39-7
Judge(s) Concurring: Irving and Griffis, P.JJ., Myers, Barnes, Ishee, Roberts, Carlton and Maxwell, JJ.
Procedural History: PCR
Nature of the Case: PCR

Trial Court: Date of Trial Judgment: 09-25-2009
Appealed from: Monroe County Circuit Court
Judge: Thomas J. Gardner
Disposition: Motion for Post-Conviction Relief Denied
Case Number: CV08-534GM

  Party Name: Attorney Name:   Brief(s) Available:
Appellant: Christopher Lashon Johnson




IMHOTEP ALKEBU-LAN



 
  • Appellant #1 Brief
  • Appellant #1 Reply Brief

  • Appellee: State of Mississippi OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: SCOTT STUART, JEFFREY A. KLINGFUSS  

    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: Post-conviction relief - Recanted testimonies - Motion to recuse - Section 99-39-7

    Summary of the Facts: Christopher Johnson was found guilty of depraved-heart murder and sentenced to life. His conviction and sentence were affirmed on appeal. After receiving permission from the Mississippi Supreme Court, Johnson filed a motion for post-conviction relief. The trial judge entered an order requiring the State to file a written response to Johnson’s motion within sixty days. Johnson then filed a motion for the judge to recuse, arguing that the trial judge’s impartiality was questionable. The trial judge denied this motion. After an evidentiary hearing on Johnson’s motion for post-conviction relief, the trial judge denied Johnson’s request for relief. Johnson appeals.

    Summary of Opinion Analysis: Issue 1: Recanted testimonies Johnson argues that a new trial is warranted since several eyewitnesses recanted their testimonies after trial. During the evidentiary hearing, the trial judge heard three of the six original eyewitnesses testify. It is clear that these three witnesses expressed doubt about their original trial testimony, but none stated that the trial testimony was incorrect. The trial judge was able to assess the credibility of the three eyewitnesses who testified at the hearing and did not abuse his discretion in denying Johnson’s motion for post-conviction relief. Issue 2: Motion to recuse Johnson argues that a reasonable person would harbor doubts about the trial judge’s impartiality. Johnson focuses on the wording in the trial judge’s order that required the State to file an answer to Johnson’s motion for post-conviction relief. Johnson argues that the trial judge showed his partiality by stating that he would have “summarily dismissed” Johnson’s petition but for the order of the supreme court. Section 99-39-7 mandates that permission be obtained from the supreme court to seek post-conviction relief from the trial court. Thus, if Johnson had not received permission from the supreme court to seek post-conviction relief in the trial court, the trial judge would have had no choice but to dismiss Johnson’s motion.


    Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court