Johnson v. State

283 P.3d 1145 (Wyo. 2012) · Supreme Court of Wyoming · August 22, 2012

Summary

The Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed Billie Colleen Johnson’s convictions for two counts of delivery of methamphetamine and her four-to-seven-year sentence. The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion by allowing a confidential informant to testify despite the State’s failure to provide the informant’s telephone number, because contact information was not required discovery and safety concerns supported withholding it. The court also held that considering Johnson’s failure to accept responsibility at sentencing did not punish her for exercising her right to a jury trial.

Court
Supreme Court of Wyoming
Writing for the Court
Voigt, Justice; Burke; Golden; Hill; Kite; Voigt
Jurisdiction
Wyoming
Decision date
August 22, 2012
Procedural posture
Johnson appealed her jury convictions for two counts of delivery of methamphetamine and her sentence of four to seven years' imprisonment.
Standard of review
The admission of particular evidence or testimony is reviewed for abuse of discretion. Because the sentencing constitutional claim was raised for the first time on appeal, it was reviewed for plain error.
Precedential value
precedential
Parties
Billie Colleen Johnson v. State of Wyoming
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

criminal procedurediscovery criminalevidencesentencingsixth amendment

Practice areas

criminal lawcriminal procedureevidencesentencingconstitutional law

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the district court abused its discretion by allowing the confidential informant to testify even though the informant's telephone number was not provided to defense counsel.
  2. Whether the district court violated Johnson's Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial by considering her failure to accept responsibility at sentencing.

Holdings

  1. The district court did not abuse its discretion by allowing the confidential informant to testify. Wyoming discovery rules did not require disclosure of a witness's telephone number, the State had a legitimate safety reason for withholding it, and the informant voluntarily declined to speak with defense counsel.
  2. The district court did not violate Johnson's Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial by considering her failure to accept responsibility. The record showed that the court was considering her continued denial of responsibility after conviction, not punishing her for choosing a jury trial.

Key quotations

A criminal defendant does not have a general constitutional right to discovery. Instead, his discovery rights are governed by statute, rule and court order. (1147)
A prosecutor "may not interfere with a witness's free choice to speak with the defense," but it is not improper for the prosecutor to inform the witness that he may decline any interviews. (1148)

Factual background

A confidential informant working with the Wyoming Division of Criminal Investigation made two controlled purchases of methamphetamine from Johnson. In the first transaction, the informant purchased two grams of methamphetamine for $400; in the second, Johnson delivered methamphetamine concealed in a tennis ball. Johnson was convicted of two delivery counts, and at sentencing she continued to deny responsibility for the conduct.

Procedural history

A jury convicted Johnson of two counts of delivering methamphetamine. The district court sentenced her to four-to-seven years in prison. On appeal, she challenged the admission of testimony from a confidential informant whose telephone number had not been disclosed and argued that the sentencing court improperly penalized her for exercising her right to a jury trial.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…