State Of Louisiana VS Christopher Johnson
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT G 2011 KA 1320 STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS CHRISTOPHER JOHNSON Judgment Rendered FEB 13 2012 On Appeal from the Nineteenth Judicial District Court In and for the Parish of East Baton Rouge State of Louisiana Docket No 08 08 0692 Honorable Anthony Marabella Judge Presiding Hillar C Moore III District Attorney Counsel for Appellee State of Louisiana Allison Miller Rutzen Assistant District Attorney Baton Rouge Louisiana Frederick Kroenke Baton Rouge Louisiana Counsel for DefendantAppellant Christopher Johnson BEFORE PETTIGREW MCCLENDON AND WELCH JJ McCLENDON 3 The defendant Christopher Johnson was charged by bill of information with two counts of attempted first degree murder violations of LSAR 14 S 30 and 14 and one count of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon a 27 violation of LSA R 14 S 95 1 The defendant pled not guilty to the charges Subsequently the defendant withdrew his not guilty pleas and following a Boykin hearing entered pleas of guilty At the sentencing hearing for each of the attempted first degree murder convictions the defendant was sentenced to fifty years at hard labor without benefit of parole probation or suspension of sentence For the possession of a firearm by a convicted felon conviction the defendant was sentenced to fifteen years at hard labor without benefit of parole probation or suspension of sentence The trial court ordered that each sentence was to run consecutively to the other sentences The defendant filed a motion to reconsider sentence which was denied designating one assignment of error The defendant now appeals For the following reasons we affirm the convictions and sentences FACTS Because the defendant pled guilty the facts were not fully developed According to a probable cause affidavit which was made a part of the appellate record on June 20 2008 the defendant fled an attempted traffic stop by Baton Rouge police officers Three males including the defendant were in the suspect vehicle When the suspect vehicle arrived at the Suburban Apartments on Hanks Drive in Baton Rouge the defendant exited the vehicle entered one of the apartments and ran to a rear bedroom defendant on foot Three police officers pursued the When the officers ordered the defendant to exit the bedroom the defendant fired multiple gunshots at the officers Two officers were struck by gunfire and the third officer was not injured The defendant was struck approximately nine times by return gunfire The defendant then ran from the bedroom where he continued to resist the officers the defendant was subdued and taken into custody Oj A Taser was used and ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR In his sole assignment of error the defendant argues the trial court erred in imposing excessive sentences sentences should have been Specifically the defendant contends his three ordered to run concurrently rather than consecutively The Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I 20 of the Louisiana Constitution prohibit the imposition of excessive or cruel punishment Although a sentence falls within statutory limits it may be excessive State v Sepulvado 367 So 762 767 La 1979 A sentence is 2d considered constitutionally excessive if it is grossly disproportionate to the seriousness of the offense or is nothing more than a purposeless and needless infliction of pain and suffering A sentence is considered grossly disproportionate if when the crime and punishment are considered in light of the harm done to society it shocks the sense of justice State v Andrews 940842 La App 1 Cir 5 655 So 448 454 The trial court has great discretion in imposing 95 2d a sentence within the statutory limits and such a sentence will not be set aside as excessive in the absence of a manifest abuse of discretion See State v Holts 525 So 1241 1245 La App 1 Cir 1988 Louisiana Code of Criminal 2d Procedure article 894 sets forth the factors for the trial court to consider when 1 imposing sentence While the entire checklist of Article 894 need not be 1 recited the record must reflect that the trial court adequately considered the criteria State v Brown 02 2231 La App 1 Cir 5 849 So 566 569 03 9 2d The articulation of the factual basis for a sentence is the goal of Article 1 894 not rigid or mechanical compliance with its provisions Where the record clearly shows an adequate factual basis for the sentence imposed remand is unnecessary even where there has not been full compliance with Article 894 1 State v Lanclos 419 So 475 478 La 1982 The trial court should review 2d the defendant personal history his prior criminal record the seriousness of the s offense the likelihood that he will commit another crime and his potential for 3 rehabilitation through correctional services other than confinement See State v ones 398 So 1049 1051 52 La 1981 2d At sentencing the trial court stated in pertinent part All right Mr Johnson I reviewed the facts of this case ve Officer Myron Daniels conducted a traffic stop on you after having witnessed you run a red light You were uncooperative during the traffic stop And while Officer Daniels waited behind the door of the vehicle ordering you to produce your license you said you re going to have to catch me and you took off You got back in your vehicle and you took off Officer Daniels pursued you to an apartment complex and during this pursuit he radioed for help He observed which apartment you went into and he and Officer Brandon Ogden entered that apartment A female was in that apartment and they asked where you were She pointed towards the back of the apartment Officer Daniels took the lead and when they rounded the corner into the room of the back of the apartment you were kneeling on the floor pointing your gun in the dri in the doorway Officer Daniels stated as soon as he saw you you opened fire on him He then returned fire Officer Daniels was struck by three bullets one which grazed his leg one which was stopped by his bulletproof vest and one which entered his abdomen After Daniels was down Officer Ogden entered in gunfire with you and also sustained a bullet wound You gave a statement to the probation officer indicating that you were pulled over at the traffic stop You knew you had an outstanding bench warrant for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon and you were also carrying a gun on your person when you were stopped and did not want to get caught with another possession of a firearm charge That is why you took off and ran You further state I feel like that both the officers and me were in the wrong I can for the life of me see that logic but that what you told t s the probation officer and I believe that what you believe and s s that a problem a real problem One of the victims in this case Corporal Myron Dan Myron Daniels was struck by a total of three bullets He spent nearly two weeks in a hospital undergoing multiple surgeries and this was in a coma for several days while he was in the hospital Corporal Daniels stated in the presentence investigation he and his family have suffered tremendously as a result of this offense and that they are reminded of it every time he puts on his uniform I want to talk a little bit about you You have four previous felony convictions as an adult On December the 7th of 1998 you were arrested by the Baton Rouge Police Department for two counts of armed robbery You were billed with armed robbery in docket number 1 990357 and on July 29th of 1999 you pled guilty as charged and were sentenced to seven years hard labor to run concurrent with all sentences serving That was in December of 98 In February of 99 you were arrested by the Baton Rouge Police Department for the offense of armed robbery You were billed with two counts of armed robbery under docket number 3 991018 and on July 29 you pled guilty as charged and got eight years concurrent with the other armed robberies you had convicted had committed Also on July the 29th you pled guilty to an armed robbery that you committed on March the 2nd of 1999 and were sentenced on July 29th 1999 to serve eight years at hard labor all running concurrent with each other You were released on parole in July of in January of 2006 On June 20th 51 of 2008 you were arrested in East Baton Rouge Parish for this charge three counts of first degree murder possession of a firearm by a convicted felon resisting an officer aggravated flight from an officer and for a bench warrant for felon in possession of a firearm You were billed with two counts of first attempted first degree murder and possession of a firearm which you pled guilty to on October the 25th of 2010 Your first conviction back in 98 July of 98 was for simple burglary While you were awaiting sentencing for your simple burglary you committed those armed robberies I just talked about At 30 years old you already classified officially re as a third felony offender While awaiting sentence for your first felony conviction for simple burglary you committed your first two armed robberies which occurred less than three months after your initial simple burglary conviction Then within another three months of committing the first armed robberies you committed two more separate armed robberies In addition to these May the 22nd of 2007 right before this all happened and the reason according to you why you ran you convictions on were arrested and charged with possession of a firearm by a convicted felon You were billed with possession of a firearm by a convicted felon and didn show up for court And that apparently t s why you said you ran Those charges were dismissed when you pled to this Throughout your extensive violent criminal history you have repeatedly shown complete disregard for human life In addition you have disrespected the authority of law enforcement the judicial system and all citizens of East Baton Rouge Parish You continued your criminal activity You have no intention or desire to become a productive lawabiding citizen And again your statement to the probation officer it was both our faults mystifies me The court after considering the guidelines as outlined in Code of Criminal Procedure Article 894 finds that there is without 1 question an undue risk that during a period of probation or suspension of sentence you will commit more crimes that you are in need of correctional treatment or a custodial environment and be effectively by his commitment to an institution and that a lesser sentence would deprecate the seriousness of the defendant scrime Mr Johnson Mr Traylor made a statement He said you know we don want to send t messages we just want justice in this case as it applies to you Mr Johnson I have tried my very best to fashion a sentence based can provided most upon what you did and who you are and what I expect you to be Department of Corrections has often asked of me and other judges when we sentence someone to a long period of time take into account when they get old they going to get sickly and we re thave the money to keep them in the hospital when they get don old m And I respect that and I always tried to do that I not ve doing that in this case It is my intention that you spend the rest of your natural life in the penitentiary The defendant suggests that his three sentences should run concurrently because the three separate counts were all based on a single incident Concurrent rather than consecutive sentences are the general rule for multiple convictions arising out of a single course of criminal conduct at least for a defendant without a prior criminal record 5 See LSAC art 883 P Cr However even if convictions arise out of a single course of conduct consecutive sentences are not necessarily excessive other factors must be taken into consideration in making this determination For instance consecutive sentences are justified where an offender poses an unusual risk to public safety State v Breland 97 2880 La App 1 Cir 11 722 So 51 53 98 6 2d In the instant matter the trial court specifically found that the defendant had an extensive violent criminal history that he had repeatedly shown complete disregard for human life and that he had disrespected the authority of law enforcement the judicial system and all citizens of East Baton Rouge Parish Given these factors along with the defendant sextraordinarily violent behavior in attempting to murder police officers the defendant clearly poses an unusual risk to the safety of the public It is within the sentencing court discretion to order s that sentences run consecutively rather than concurrently State v Conway 588 So 1369 1374 La App 2 Cir 1991 2d Under these circumstances the imposition of consecutive sentences for the crimes committed by the defendant does not render these sentences excessive The defendant was sentenced to the maximum sentence for each of his convictions See LSA R 14 14 14 95 prior to the S 27 30 b 12 6 DC 1 2010 amendment As a general rule maximum or near maximum sentences are to be reserved for the worst offenders and the worst offenses State v James 02 2079 La App 1 Cir 5 849 So 574 586 Also maximum 03 9 2d sentences permitted under a statute may be imposed when the offender poses an unusual risk to the public safety due to his past conduct of repeated criminality See State v Hilton 991239 La App 1 Cir 3 764 So 00 31 2d 1027 1037 writ denied 00 0958 La 3 786 So 113 01 9 2d The trial court adequately considered the factors set forth in Article 894 1 Considering the trial court careful review of the circumstances the presentence s investigation report the defendant sprevious convictions his violent history and the nature of the instant crimes we find no abuse of discretion by the trial court The trial court provided ample justification for the imposition of the maximum sentences allowed by law and found noting in particular that the defendant had four previous felony convictions as an adult and that he had no intention or desire to become a productive lawabiding citizen See State v Mickey 604 2d So 675 678 79 La App 1 Cir 1992 writ denied 610 So 795 La 1993 2d Accordingly the sentences imposed are not grossly disproportionate to the severity of the offenses and therefore are not unconstitutionally excessive The assignment of error is without merit SENTENCING ERROR Under LSAC art 920 we are limited in our review to errors P Cr 2 discoverable by a mere inspection of the pleadings and proceedings without inspection of the evidence After a careful review of the record we have found a sentencing error See State v Price 05 2514 La App 1 Cir 12 952 06 28 2d So 112 123 24 en banc writ denied 07 0130 La 2 976 So 08 22 2d 1277 For his possession of a firearm by a convicted felon conviction the defendant was sentenced to fifteen years at hard labor without benefit of probation parole or suspension of sentence Whoever is found guilty of violating the possession of a firearm by a convicted felon provision shall be imprisoned at hard labor for not less than ten nor more than fifteen years without benefits and be fined not less than one thousand dollars nor more than five thousand dollars La R 14 prior to the 2010 amendment The S 95 B 1 trial court failed to impose the mandatory fine Accordingly the defendant s sentence which did not include the mandatory fine is illegally lenient However since the sentencing error is not inherently prejudicial to the defendant and neither the State nor the defendant has raised this sentencing issue on appeal we decline to correct this error See Price 952 So at 123 25 2d 1 The minutes reflect that no fine was imposed I CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons we affirm the defendant convictions and s sentences SENTENCES AND CONVICTIONS AFFIRMED
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.
