Johnson v. State
27 A.3d 541
| Del. | 2011Background
- Johnson was convicted at trial of two counts of Possession of a Deadly Weapon by a Person Prohibited, two counts of Possession of Ammunition by a Person Prohibited, Resisting Arrest, and Possession of Drug Paraphernalia; sentenced on the weapon counts to six years minimum in prison, concurrent? consecutive? (six years total).
- On direct appeal, Johnson challenged the trial court’s denial of a request to give a Lolly instruction regarding missing clothing that concealed the weapons.
- Police stopped Reeves’ Isuzu; shotgun shells were found in a sock behind the front passenger seat where Johnson sat.
- A loaded .25 caliber handgun was found in the Isuzu; a Mossberg shotgun was later found in Johnson’s cousin’s bedroom during an administrative search.
- A probation search of 221 Monarch Circle yielded additional items linking to Johnson, including ammunition, a digital scale, and mail addressed to him.
- The State pursued Johnson on the weapons charges largely through circumstantial evidence tying him to the bedroom and car; Reeves’ involvement was central but Reeves was later nol prossed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was there a due process violation for failing to preserve clothing evidence? | State argues clothing would not be material under Rule 16 or Brady. | Johnson argues missing clothing is material and its absence requires remedy. | Reversed; failure to gather/preserve clothing violated due process and required remedy. |
| Did the court err in denying a Lolly instruction on missing evidence? | State contends no unique clothing, no Lolly instruction needed. | Johnson argues missing clothing could exculpate him and warrant Lolly instruction. | Harmless error not shown; Lolly instruction warranted; reversible error found. |
Key Cases Cited
- Deberry v. State, 457 A.2d 744 (Del. 1983) (establishes due process preservation framework for missing/evidence obtained late)
- Lolly v. State, 611 A.2d 956 (Del.1992) (missing evidence instructions may be warranted in circumstantial cases)
- Bailey v. State, 521 A.2d 1069 (Del.1987) (secondary evidence and probative value considerations in missing evidence analysis)
- Hammond v. State, 569 A.2d 81 (Del.1989) (guides assessment of consequences for failure to gather material evidence)
- United States v. Valenzuela-Bernal, 458 U.S. 858 (U.S. 1982) (due process and rights to evidence apply; framework for disclosure)