Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Johnson v. Horton

United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division

February 8, 2018

BRANDON JOHNSON, Petitioner,
v.
CONNIE HORTON, Respondent.

          OPINION AND ORDER REQUIRING PETITIONER TO DECIDE HOW HE WISHES TO PROCEED IN THIS CASE

          LINDA V. PARKER U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE.

         Michigan prisoner Brandon Johnson (“Petitioner”) filed this habeas case under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner pled guilty in the Wayne Circuit Court to assault with intent to commit murder, Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.83, carrying a concealed weapon, Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.227, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony, Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.227b. Petitioner was sentenced to 9-to-20 years' incarceration for the assault conviction, 3-to-5 years' incarceration for carrying a concealed weapon conviction, and a consecutive two years' incarceration for the firearm conviction.

         The petition raises five claims: (1) Petitioner is entitled to evidentiary hearing in the state court on his claim that he was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel leading to an involuntary plea; (2) Petitioner's second trial counsel provided ineffective assistance of counsel by failing to subpoena original counsel for a hearing to demonstrate that Petitioner's plea was involuntary; (3) Petitioner's second trial counsel provided ineffective assistance of counsel by pressuring him to accept a plea offer; (4) Petitioner's first trial counsel provided ineffective assistance of counsel by failing to conduct an adequate pretrial investigation of Petitioner's alibi defense and witnesses; and (5) Petitioner's appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to raise several meritorious claims during Petitioner's direct appeal.

         Respondent filed a motion to dismiss the petition on the grounds that Petitioner failed to exhaust his state court remedies with respect to his fourth and fifth habeas claims. The Court orders Petitioner to decide whether he wishes to delete his unexhausted fourth and fifth claims from his petition and proceed on the merits of his remaining claims, or whether he wishes for his petition to be held in abeyance while he presents his unexhausted claims in a motion for relief from judgment and subsequent appeal in state court, and then if necessary, return to this Court on all five of his habeas claims.

         I. Background

         Following his conviction and sentence, Petitioner raised the following claims in an application for leave to appeal in the Michigan Court of Appeals:

I. The court should remand for a Ginther hearing where Mr. Johnson made a timely pre-sentence motion to withdraw the plea and alleged specific instances of ineffective assistance of counsel leading to an involuntary plea.
II. Substitute trial counsel provided ineffective assistance of counsel in failing to subpoena original trial counsel for the Ginther hearing, this [sic] violating the State and Federal constitutional right to counsel.
III. Mr. Johnson entered into an involuntary plea in violation of the State and Federal Due Process Clauses where he claimed defense counsel would not call his alibi witnesses at trial and defense counsel said he could not win at trial and pressured him to accept the plea offer, thus creating little choice for this innocent defendant but to plead no contest.

         The Michigan Court of Appeals denied Petitioner's application for leave to appeal “for lack of merit in the grounds presented.” People v. Johnson, No. 329000, at *1 (Mich. Ct. App. Oct. 6, 2015). Petitioner then filed a pro se application for leave to appeal in the Michigan Supreme Court, raising the same claims and adding two new claims:

I. Ineffective assistance of [original] trial counsel in failing to investigate and/or interview witnesses.
II. Ineffective assistance of appellate counsel.

         On March 29, 2016, the Michigan Supreme Court denied the application because it was not persuaded that the Court should review the questions presented. People v. Johnson, 876 N.W.2d 556 (Mich. 2016) (unpublished table decision).

         II. ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.