Johnson v. State, 493,1989
| Decision Date | 29 January 1990 |
| Docket Number | No. 493,1989,493,1989 |
| Citation | 571 A.2d 787 |
| Parties | Raymond C. JOHNSON, Defendant Below, Appellant, v. STATE of Delaware, Plaintiff Below, Appellee. . Submitted: |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Delaware |
Before CHRISTIE, Chief Justice, and WALSH and HOLLAND, Justices.
This 8th day of February, 1990, it appears to the Court that:
1) On July 16, 1981, following a jury trial, the defendant-appellant, Raymond C. Johnson ("Johnson"), was found guilty of Rape in the First Degree; Sexual Assault; Unlawful Imprisonment in the First Degree; and four counts of Sodomy in the First Degree. On January 20, 1982, while two motions for a new trial were pending 1, Johnson discharged his two trial attorneys, assistant Public Defenders and retained private counsel. On April 19, 1982, the Superior Court sentenced Johnson to life imprisonment plus sixty-seven years of imprisonment on the verdicts.
2) On April 28, 1982, Johnson's privately retained attorney filed a motion for postconviction relief, requesting a new trial, under former Superior Court Criminal Rule 35(a). That motion alleged that errors had occurred during the prosecution and charged that trial counsel had been ineffective.
3) On May 27, 1982, while the motion for postconviction relief, which had been filed by his attorney, was still pending in the Superior Court, Johnson, appearing pro se, filed an appeal to this Court from his convictions. On July 6, 1982, this Court dismissed Johnson's appeal as being untimely. Johnson v. State, Del.Supr., No. 152, 1982, Horsey, J. (July 6, 1982) (ORDER).
4) Thereafter, the Superior Court held an evidentiary hearing on Johnson's Rule 35 motion. Johnson was represented in those proceedings, by his privately retained counsel. On November 29, 1984, after briefing, the Superior Court denied Johnson's motion for postconviction relief.
5) On January 25, 1985, Johnson, again appearing pro se, filed an appeal with this Court from the Superior Court's ruling, which denied his motion for postconviction relief. On March 7, 1985, this Court, sua sponte, dismissed that appeal as untimely. Johnson v. State, Del.Supr., No. 27, 1985, Christie, J. (March 7, 1985) (ORDER).
6) On October 31, 1989, four and one-half years later, Johnson filed another "Rule 35" "Motion to Reverse Conviction and Vacate Sentence" in the Superior Court. In that document, Johnson alleged that his trial counsel had been ineffective by not filing an appeal from his convictions in 1982 and 1985. In addition, Johnson raised several challenges to his convictions.
7) On November 8, 1989, the Superior Court summarily dismissed Johnson's motion:
A review of your application under Rule 35(a) would seem to indicate that you were unaware that that rule has been amended and presently does not provide the relief you seek. A copy of that rule is enclosed.
Remedies previously available under Rule 35(a) are now covered by Rule 61. Rule 61(i) provides that "a motion for postconviction relief may not be filed more than three years after the judgment of conviction is final...." You may wish to review Rule 61 in its entirety rather than rely on my representations.
Your Motion to Reverse Conviction and Vacate Judgment is denied.
8) Johnson has now filed a timely appeal of that dismissal. The State has filed a motion to affirm the decision of the Superior Court.
9) On January 1, 1988, new Superior Court Criminal Rule 61 became effective. However, the new three-year limitation period set forth in Rule 61(i)(1) did not become operative until one year later. On January 1, 1989, the three-year time bar became applicable, even as to convictions entered prior to the adoption of Rule 61. See Boyer v. State, Del.Supr., 562 A.2d 1186, 1187-88 (1989).
10) Johnson knew of the dismissal of his...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Johnson v. Ellingsworth, Civ. A. No. 90-255-JLL.
...for postconviction relief was an exception to the general requirement of Rule 61."7Johnson v. State, No. 493, 1989, slip op. at 4 (Del.1990) 571 A.2d 787 (table) (attached at D.I. 2 at Ex. 15). The order refers exclusively to Delaware procedural rules and Delaware cases. See id. Consequentl......