STATE v JOHNSON
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
95-051 NO. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 1995 STATE OF MONTANA, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DAVID CHRISTOPHER Defendant APPEAL FROM: JOHNSON, and Appellant. District Court of the Eighth Judicial In and for the County of Cascade, The Honorable John M. McCarvel, Judge District, presiding. COUNSEL OF RECORD: For Appellant: John For Keith, Great Falls, Montana Respondent: Jospeh P. Mazurek, Attorney General, John Paulson, Assistant Attorney General, Helena, Montana; Brant Light, Cascade County Attorney, Shawn Glen, Deputy Cascade County Attorney, Great Falls, Montana Submitted on Briefs: Decided: Filed: September November 13, 30, 1995 1995 Justice James David counts to criminal wherein his his moved count. Johnson was to all District for ten years is five of whether for was Prior the Eighth Johnson denied years his five counts. allowing Court denial with agreement Court with Court. charged five an order the the A plea The District appeals pleas. the to motion suspended motion to on withdraw We affirm. issue discretion to the of drugs. guilty County, pleas. Johnson The sole its Cascade guilty sentenced guilty dangerous Johnson withdraw Opinion (Johnson) pleaded District, each of Johnson Judicial the Johnson sale sentencing, and delivered Christopher of reached C. Nelson in on appeal denying Johnson's the District motion to Court withdraw abused his guilty pleas. Johnson charged was arrested on October five of with violation of supporting affidavit confidential 13 and possessed § counts alleged informant September a criminal MCA 45-g-101, 27, handgun 1, sale 1993. the to last Falls dangerous drugs sold marijuana the two and in information occasions According during Great The Johnson separate in of (1991). that on five 1993, between affidavit, transactions and to a September Johnson with the informant. An attorney was appointed entered District Johnson's pleas Court with to of the represent not denied Cascade County At Johnson. guilty a motion on each for bail. 2 Public his count. a reduction Defenders' arraignment, Office Johnson Additionally, in the the amount of On January requesting 7, substitution had a conflict defendants against Court public office On January reduced 27, 1994, Johnson indicated withdrawal, appointed Anderson, to represent that allowed his he wanted to multiplicity court. of to defend dismiss Johnson was released Johnson Johnson's with jury that another selection, the District attorney the District bail and trial trial, requesting 20, 1994, $100,000 to filed that a the a February 4, he did not object that to granted thus during These motions Johnson's charging from an associate selective from jail the from the motion. public defender, Johnson. himself On the day set for from The Johnson. After Court himself, for charges. By stipulation, to testify. on March 22, 1994, Johnson informed Johnson to represent motions criminal and requested Johnson. the District Marvin attorney for other second attorney of record attorney counsel attorney bail Johnson's as counsel At the omnibus hearing court Johnson's motion that was held on January at which as the third two to represent another attorney's The court hearing a stated and another was appointed Court appoint The motion motion reduction District 1994 hearing, his the to be relieved court filed he was representing granted A second bail motion attorney whom Johnson would be called defenders' $15,000. Johnson's of counsel. because District and the 1994, attorney the District the hearing Court and argue prosecution were later was set for and denied was reduced to be appointed. by the $2,500. a letter incompetence Before Court held a hearing for May 16, 1994. Court received with the and proceeding and inquired about the letter. Johnson be represented refused by Anderson to represent appoint entered to dire a plea agreement with guilty and the concurrent sentences weapons plea guilty filed to same because all District the appointed Cascade represent to The court required Johnson to counsel. prospective jurors, Johnson prosecutor wherein Johnson the counts of agreed criminal to sale recommend offender County be of ten-year designation and Johnson Public relieved leave operation or entered a Defenders' Johnson's as to Office counsel intervene in and effectiveness granted the independent counsel want counts. granted Court counsel. was dismissed had been the not as standby dangerous to involving The five other the prosecutor no he did Johnson, five requesting Johnson lawsuit the The jury day, a motion to with enhancement. that Anderson to voir drugs, That court for and designated plead dangerous of counsel attempting into agreed the and requested other himself, After told motion of the June filed Johnson 17, 21, a motion 1994, conducted the time a hearing motion suspended and Johnson parole the 1994, and to set count. was designated eligibility. his withdraw for office. following day and office his to The to sentences a non-dangerous Johnson now appeals 4 appointed guilty the ten On October District years were to offender the counsel, pleas. Court The District motion. Johnson defenders' fourth sentencing, on Johnson's sentenced on each through public that Johnson. On the of a federal denial also Court denied five years with run concurrently for of purposes his of motion to withdraw Did his the Johnson's set addresses in 8, Mont. its a denial of court State v. 175, 818 Reynolds (citing case v. Enoch (1994), Radi (1991), State 1203, v. 1206). Our a guilty discretion. (19921, court each State to withdraw its denying a trial which plea; record. P.Zd a motion abused under 177 in pleas? a guilty unique 887 P.2d discretion guilty withdraw of light its exists to 158-59, district his standard 155, reviewing (citing or 11, abuse withdraw a request 269 Mont. the Court to rule considered pleas. District motion No 250 guilty 253 Mont. 386, be standard plea Enoch, must is whether 887 P.2d 390, in at 833 P.2d 177 153, 155). Johnson State if alleges that his that he would with the threat he did not plead and voluntarily at the time ineffective the he his a more pleas by severe were the sentence not knowingly entered pleas. a claim his of counsel at any time of that coerced medication allowing possibility of 1206 (quoting State 781, the He also by his MCA, to be withdrawn good cause, receive were he was on anti-depressant 46-16-105(2), plea purpose and pleas made because assistance Section guilty guilty guilty former states that or after withdrawal plea judgment. a guilty Court an innocent Anderson. v. Arledge considers three (1987), factors 5 man." may permit substituted, "The plea Radi -, of a for fundamental is to prevent 818 P.2d at 785). This convicting of attorney, a court and a non-guilty before alleges 228 Mont. to 225, determine 232, 741 P.2d whether good cause existed allow and whether withdrawal of a guilty interrogation at defendant's with the plea: time Court erred in refusing the plea was entered of the consequences regarding of the plea; the defendant attempts to withdraw that the plea was the result of a plea guilty charge. plea was given Enoch -I As to the first in exchange for 887 P.2d at 177; -I Radi factor, this the (2) the the plea; bargain in dismissal of 818 P.2d at 1206. adequacy of the court's at the time the plea was entered, to (1) the adequacy of the court's which and (3) the fact another the understanding promptness which the District interrogation Court has previously stated: Where a District Court has done all that it can to determine from the defendant or otherwise, that the proposed plea of guilty is voluntarily made, the defendant understands what he is doing and is advised of the consequences of his plea, including the nature and extent of his punishment, has been adequately advised by counsel, and has been treated fairly at all stages of the prosecution against him, and that in fact the defendant states he is guilty of the charges made, then this Court has a duty to support the District Court when it allows a plea of guilty to be entered in place of a plea of not guilty. Radi -I 199, 818 P.2d 202, In guilty at 738 P.2d 487, addition plea, entitled Contrary inadequate 1208 (quoting to a plea of Waiver combination agreement and criteria. the Long assertions of written This the in (1987), agreement that 227 Mont. in-court and his a document interrogation specified do was in § 46-12-210, interrogation, has previously 6 regarding by Plea of Guilty." the court's acknowledgement Court court of Rights and did not meet the criteria MCA, the necessary interrogated signed "Acknowledgment to Johnson's v. 489). being Johnson State contain held that the plea all the a written acknowledgement, constitutes combined with adequate oral questioning interrogation. State Mont. 89, 95, 870 P.2d 65, 69 (citing Mont. 70, 73, 712 P.2d 1348, The second factor, attempts to withdraw Johnson filed his entering his guilty request to reasonable less pleas. month delay considered between the than It which (1986), has long 220 since a half been the be defendant favor and should after rule that a made within 178 (citing 184 P.2d 554, plea the Johnson's a month 887 P.2d at 165, in plea the guilty factor, record negotiated with agreed to plead guilty plea, sentences with 264 State 561). v. In Enoch, and a motion a Nance a two- to withdraw was reasonable. As to the third bargain, v. Walker weighs guilty Enoch, 120 Mont 152, (1947), than plea, motion time. State promptness a v. Mahoney (1994), 1350). the withdraw of the defendant, the plea was the result of a plea that shows Johnson, attorney, the prosecutor guilty the of life often an held accused to obligations of a plea bargain (1994), that to after 269 Mont. Johnson exchange for recommend a far sentence In addition, enhancement the for the lend its designation. Court "will escaping accepting its not his benefits." 68, 74, 807 P.2d 214, 7 a concurrent lenient more in this criminal before In imprisonment. offender his occasions not to recommend a sentence assistance v. Milinovich through counts. on each count, use of a weapon or a dangerous We have five agreed prosecutor the maximum penalty agreed on several on all of ten years prosecutor that or her State 218 (quoting Reynolds, 833 P.2d Johnson contends more at 157). attacks that severe the he was voluntariness coerced sentence if he did antidepressant medication States Supreme Court simply because it Milinovich, 397 U.S. 742, Moreover, signed, not suffering that including guilty and that time any to that is a Brady v. not 25 States of of or mental drugs, he understood rights that he was from or he was 760). Johnson disability alcohol what (1970), 747, was made voluntarily; emotional involuntary L.Ed.2d waiver United punishment. United 1472, a he was on The greater He receive pleas. a plea of plea his avoid 1463, use of that (citing his the and plead acknowledgement under medication; 216 pleas. he would held 90 S.Ct. the he stated cause at guilty that the entered his threats not long was 755, in at has 887 P.2d by of any prescription doing by pleading violations occurred guilty. Johnson prior to also plea the claims that constitutional agreement. He claims that was denied because he was forced to represent a form double jeopardy to his of However, because defenses 267 which Mont. hearing, 358, Johnson Thereafter, plea. Johnson occurred 349, Skroch, Johnson due 883 may only 883 P.2d was at not counsel and he claims multiplicity of charges. guilty, to the P.2d himself to the pleaded prior right he all factual State plea. 1256, 1262-63 attack the 1263. counsel. 8 v. Skroch (citations (1994), omitted). voluntary nature at change Moreover, unrepresented waived but in the fact had of of his plea standby Johnson involving claims dS0 Anderson, guilty pleas. ineffective Johnson's To Strickland 107, 114, test, assistance counsel at determine this the time whether of counsel, assistance part ineffective adopted 708 P.2d 227, COlXEXl he entered defendant v. Robbins In that his received Court must conduct in State 232. a of (1985), the two218 Mont. case we stated: First, the defendant must show that counsel's performance was deficient. This requires showing that counsel made errors so serious that counsel was not functioning as the "counsel" guaranteed the defendant by the Sixth Amendment. Second, the defendant must show that the deficient performance prejudiced the defense. This requires showing that counsel's errors were so serious as to deprive the defendant of a fair trial, a trial whose result is reliable. Robbins, 708 P.2d at 232 (citing 466 U.S. 668, issue that 104 S.Ct. is a defendant's but for plea, guilty a guilty plea. 2064, the defendant deficient Senn (1990), 244 Mont. only any deficient prepared packet of Mahoney, represent to represent himself Johnson to represent Additionally, with for at trial. It himself the record that despite in case 9 State the guilty pleas was not prepared Johnson decided after the a to court ordered the guilty pleas. the plea agreement expected Johnson's would not he also Johnson entered shows that must demonstrate Anderson trial, was only what Johnson had originally Furthermore, at the 975). he entered by Anderson. Johnson If 870 P.2d at 73 (citing that Johnson (1984), 674). a defendant 56, 59, 795 P.2d 973, performance information 80 L.Ed.2d performance, Johnson has not demonstrated due to v. Washington 2052, counsel's have entered v. 687, Strickland was in line to receive. assertions that a conflict of interest existed Johnson has failed to lawsuit involving the conflict that stated his attorney that at his allow withdrawal Court did his intervention defender's affected Anderson's and in the acknowledgement since of his not abuse its guilty pleas, discretion that We Concur: 10 federal resulted in satisfied of rights he by his attorney. to show good cause we hold a Moreover, he was of waiver by denying Affirmed. the performance. represented Johnson has failed in office change of plea hearing and properly ineffective, assistance public he was fairly Accordingly, Anderson's show that adversely Johnson stated with rendering that the Johnson's District motion. to
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
