State v. Johnson
904 N.W.2d 714
Neb.2017Background
- Craig A. Johnson was convicted by a jury of first-degree murder, use of a deadly weapon to commit a felony, and possession of a deadly weapon by a prohibited person for the killing of his girlfriend, April Smith; evidence included stabbing/suffocation injuries, April’s DNA on a knife, Johnson’s fingerprint on a trash bag, and April’s blood on Johnson’s clothing and shoes.
- Johnson did not testify at trial; he was sentenced to consecutive prison terms (including life) and appealed; the direct appeal rejected several claims and found one evidentiary error harmless.
- Johnson filed a verified postconviction motion (first opportunity to raise ineffective-assistance claims because same counsel represented him at trial and on appeal) alleging multiple instances of ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel and a speedy-trial violation.
- The district court denied postconviction relief without an evidentiary hearing, concluding Johnson failed to allege sufficient facts and the record affirmatively showed he was entitled to no relief.
- On appeal from that denial, the Nebraska Supreme Court reviewed de novo whether the motion alleged facts warranting an evidentiary hearing and whether, on the record, Johnson was entitled to relief.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Johnson) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance during voir dire (failure to object to prosecutor remarks) | Prosecutor made improper remarks (e.g., “no gun play,” not seeking death penalty, evidence “not pretty,” defendant has “obligation” to test evidence) that counsel should have objected to | Remarks were lawful explanations to jurors, limited in context, and jury was properly instructed; no prejudice given overwhelming evidence | No ineffective assistance; remarks not improper or not prejudicial |
| Ineffective assistance re: motion for directed verdict (counsel failed to argue) | Counsel failed to argue the directed verdict motion, which should have been granted on counts tied to knife/fingerprints | Sufficient evidence supported convictions (statements, scene evidence, DNA/blood, fingerprints, possession of victim’s van); argument would have been futile | No ineffective assistance; motion properly denied and counsel not prejudicial |
| Ineffective assistance re: closing argument (failure to object) | Prosecutor’s closing inflamed jury and improperly attacked defense/theories | Prosecutor drew reasonable inferences from evidence; comments were supported and jury instructed on inferences and that arguments are not evidence | No ineffective assistance; closing was proper and not misconduct |
| Right to testify (counsel prevented Johnson from testifying) | Johnson would have testified he did not commit the murder and explained Michigan trip; counsel waived his right to testify | Allegations are conclusory; no specific proffer of the testimony or showing of interference or unreasonable advice | No ineffective assistance; motion lacked specific factual allegations to merit hearing |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-part test for ineffective assistance: deficient performance and prejudice)
- Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986) (prohibition on race-based peremptory strikes)
- State v. Vela, 297 Neb. 227 (2017) (standards for postconviction relief and evidentiary hearing requirements)
- State v. Dubray, 289 Neb. 208 (2014) (defense counsel and appellate counsel ineffectiveness standards; summation and inferences)
- State v. Iromuanya, 282 Neb. 798 (2011) (right to testify and counsel’s role in advising defendant)
Disposition: The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed the district court’s denial of postconviction relief without an evidentiary hearing.