Johnson v. State
427 Md. 356
| Md. | 2012Background
- Petitioner Johnson convicted in 1992 of assault with intent to murder among other crimes not charged in the indictment.
- Indictment charged four offenses: attempted murder, common law assault, unlawful wearing/carrying/transporting of a handgun, and unlawful use of a handgun in a felony or crime of violence.
- The verdict included assault with intent to murder, and the trial court imposed a 30-year sentence for that offense, with related mergers.
- Petitioner did not object at trial or sentencing to assault with intent to murder; direct appeal followed without challenging that conviction.
- In 2008, Johnson filed a motion to correct an illegal sentence under Rule 4-345(a) arguing the indictment did not charge assault with intent to murder.
- Court of Special Appeals held the motion untimely and that there was a constructive amendment to the indictment; this Court granted certiorari and reversed, vacating the assault with intent to murder conviction and sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether convicting and sentencing on a charge not in the indictment was illegal. | Johnson argues assault with intent to murder was not charged and not a lesser included offense. | State argues constructive amendment permitted the charge to be included. | Illegal conviction and sentence for assault with intent to murder; vacated. |
| Whether Rule 4-345(a) permits review “at any time” notwithstanding timing of direct appeal. | Johnson's motion arises under 4-345(a) and is not waived. | State asserts untimeliness under 4-345(a) and 4-252(d). | Rule 4-345(a) permits correction at any time for an illegal sentence. |
| Whether the indictment was constructively amended to include assault with intent to murder. | Constructive amendment was improper; amendment not allowed. | The record shows the charge was addressed in instructions and verdict. | Rule 4-204 requires formal amendment; constructive amendment invalid; no proper amendment occurred. |
| Whether the conviction for use of a handgun during the commission of a felony/crime of violence should be vacated with the assault conviction. | If assault conviction is vacated, related handgun-use conviction might fail for lack of predicate. | Three other felonies support the handgun-use conviction; should stand. | Handgun-use conviction remains supported by other valid predicates; not vacated. |
| Whether laches or waiver bars review of the illegal-sentence claim. | Waiver due to acquiescence; timely review not required. | No waiver; laches lack prejudice. | No laches; review permitted under Rule 4-345(a). |
Key Cases Cited
- Jones v. State, 384 Md. 669 (2005) (illegal sentence when verdict not orally announced and not polled)
- Chaney v. State, 397 Md. 460 (2007) (Rule 4-345(a) relief available for illegal sentence; narrow scope)
- Tracy v. State, 319 Md. 452 (1990) (amendments to charging documents; not allowed to add new offenses under Rule 4-204)
- Brown v. State, 285 Md. 105 (1979) (indictment amendment control; predecessor to 4-204)
- State v. Morton, 295 Md. 487 (1983) (indictment must inform defendant; due process)