Johnson v. State

The trial court's error in using a less stringent standard than required by O.C.G.A. § 24-9-84.1 a 2 to determine whether to admit defendant's prior felony convictions was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

After a jury trial, Paul Johnson was convicted of aggravated assault. Johnson appeals, arguing that the trial court erred in allowing the state to impeach him with evidence of his prior felony convictions. We do find that, in deciding to admit that evidence, the trial court did not apply the standard mandated by the controlling statute. But the error was harmless, as the evidence of Johnson’s guilt was overwhelming. “On appeal from a criminal conviction, we view the evidence in the light most favorable to support the jury’s verdict, and the defendant no longer enjoys the presumption of innocence. Cit.” Abercrombie v. State , 297 Ga. App. 522, 522-523 677 SE2d 719 2009. Viewed in that light, the evidence shows that both Johnson and Demetrius Lane were dating Kenbernika Little. On July 25, 2007, Lane was playing a video game in a bedroom inside Little’s mobile home when Johnson arrived on the front porch, brandishing two knives and yelling to be let in the home. Little refused to let him in, but went out to speak to him on the front porch. Johnson argued with Little about her relationship with Lane, then forced his way into the home. Johnson found Lane in the bedroom and attacked him. Johnson stabbed Lane multiple times with the knives, inflicting six life-threatening puncture wounds to his torso and a collapsed lung. Johnson fled from the scene, and police officers later discovered him hiding in a bedroom closet at his house. The blood-stained knives were also found hidden in Johnson’s bedroom.

Johnson was the only witness for the defense. He admitted that he stabbed Lane, but claimed that he did so only after Lane attacked him with a knife. On cross-examination, the state was allowed to impeach Johnson’s credibility by introducing certified copies of his convictions in 2000 and 2002 for aggravated assault, terroristic threats and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon.

Johnson v. State

The trial court's error in using a less stringent standard than required by O.C.G.A. § 24-9-84.1 a 2 to determine whether to admit defendant's prior felony convictions was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report