Johnson v. State
110 So. 3d 954
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2013Background
- Johnson convicted of eight counts of armed robbery with a firearm; concurrent 50-year terms on each count.
- Co-defendant charged with four Broward County robberies; three on Oct. 8, 2007, one on Sept. 4, 2007.
- Trial court admitted collateral-crime (Williams) evidence about the Sept. 4 robbery for MOI/identity; denied severance; admitted historical cell-site records without warrant under 934.23.
- Evidence tied robberies by similarities: time window, location, method, and cellphone calls around robberies; camouflage hat with DNA linked to defendant.
- Jury convicted on all counts; appellate court affirmed challenging admissibility of collateral evidence, severance, and cell-site records.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of collateral crime evidence for MOI/identity | Johnson; Williams evidence admitted | Johnson; evidence improper without clear/convincing proof | Admissible; sufficient similarity and proof under Williams rule |
| Severance of the three October robberies | State seeks consolidation as crime spree | Johnson argues prejudicial spillover | No abuse of discretion; offenses properly part of a crime spree |
| Admissibility of historical cell-site records without warrant under 934.23 | State; Mitchell permits admissibility | Privacy/ Fourth Amendment concerns barred by 934.23 | No error; historical cell-site information admissible per Mitchell v. State |
Key Cases Cited
- Mitchell v. State, 25 So.3d 632 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009) (historical cell-site information not protected by privacy expectations; not suppressible under Fourth Amendment)
- Durousseau v. State, 55 So.3d 543 (Fla.2010) (requires similarity for identity in collateral-crime evidence)
- Peterson v. State, 2 So.3d 146 (Fla.2009) (identifiable similarities in collateral acts required for identity theory)
- Corinthian v. State, 761 So.2d 1180 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000) (admission of collateral crime evidence proper when numerous similarities exist)
- Crossley v. State, 596 So.2d 447 (Fla.1992) (severance discretion analysis; distinguishable facts)
- Bundy v. State, 455 So.2d 330 (Fla.1984) (crime-spree consolidation factors include temporal/geographic proximity and manner)
- Stephens v. State, 863 So.2d 434 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003) (crime spree analysis for joinder/severance)
- Rohan v. State, 696 So.2d 901 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997) (recurrent proximity of crimes supports spree characterization)
- Williams v. State, 110 So.2d 654 (Fla.1959) (classic Williams Rule; admissibility framework for collateral crimes)
- Cartwright v. State, 885 So.2d 1010 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (reaffirmation of Williams rule standards)
- Audano v. State, 641 So.2d 1356 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994) (necessity of showing clear and convincing evidence for collateral act)
- Alsfield v. State, 22 So.3d 619 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009) (clear/convincing evidence standard for collateral acts)