STACEY E. JOHNSON

DOB: November 26, 1969
Race: African American
Gender: Male

County of conviction: Sevier (Pike on retrial)
Number of counts: 1
Race of victim: White
Gender of victim: Female
Date of crime: April 1 or 2, 1993
Date of sentencing: September 23, 1994

Trial Counsel:

Mickey Buchanan
David L. Clark

Current proceedings:

• Petition for habeas corpus pending in U.S. District Court, E.D. Ark., Case No. 5:06-CV-00185, (J. Holmes, J.).

Last judicial decision:

• Arkansas Supreme Court affirms circuit court's denial of DNA motion.  Johnson v. State, ___ S.W.3d ___, 2006 WL 1349052 (Ark. May 18, 2006).
   
• Denial of post-conviction relief affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded by Johnson v. State, 157 S.W.3d 151 (Ark), cert. denied, 125 S.Ct. 326 (2004).

Current counsel:

Dorcy Corbin
Arkansas Public Defender
101 E. Capitol, Suite 201
Little Rock, AR 72201
(501)-682-9070

Jeff Rosenzweig
300 Spring St., Suite 310
Little Rock, AR 72201
jrosenzweig@worldnet.att.net
(501)-372-5247

Reported Opinions:

• Arkansas Supreme Court affirms circuit court's denial of DNA motion.  Johnson v. State, ___ S.W.3d ___, 2006 WL 1349052 (Ark. May 18, 2006).
   
• Denial of post-conviction relief affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded by Johnson v. State, 157 S.W.3d 151 (Ark), cert. denied, 125 S.Ct. 326 (2004).
   
• Conviction and sentence affirmed on direct appeal following retrial. Johnson v. State, 27 S.W.3d 405 (Ark. 2000), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 944 (2001).
   
• Conviction and sentence reversed on direct appeal, and remanded for new trial, by Johnson v. State, 934 S.W.2d 179 (Ark. 1996), cert. denied, 520 U.S. 1242 (1997).

Significant legal issues:

• trial court's exclusion of child-witness's therapist's testimony as privileged, where state itself presented evidence of child's competency and ability to testify through a different therapist; waiver of privilege as to one therapist was held not to extend to second therapist. Excluded therapist would have testified that child could not accurately remember the events in question, and that child's testimony was likely the product of what she had heard from others
   
• Ineffective Assistance of Counsel
   
• DNA evidence

Return to casetracker list