Opinion ID: 1652318
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Dr. Bernard

Text: Johnson contends that his counsel's performance fell below an objectively reasonable standard when she did not call Dr. Carol Bernard, a psychologist. Dr. Bernard was instructed to conduct a personality assessment and to assess Johnson's intellectual and cognitive functioning. She interviewed Johnson for a total of eight hours. She reported to McKerrow after the tests had been administered, but they had not yet been scored. McKerrow did not contact Dr. Bernard again for the test results. Dr. Bernard testified at the motion hearing that there was one test that she did not complete and another for which she received invalid results. She was able to conclude from IQ testing, however, that Johnson was in the first or second percentilethe borderline mentally retarded rangemeaning that ninety-eight percent of those tested perform at a higher level. She suspected that his reading ability was below the sixth-grade level. She also noted that the way that he reversed letters and words indicated that he had a learning disability. She concluded that on the night of the crime, Johnson was suffering from cocaine intoxication. Dr. Bernard testified that after arriving at her initial diagnosis, she underwent surgery, but would have been available to testify at trial. Even if McKerrow had followed up on the valid tests Dr. Bernard was able to complete, and if McKerrow had presented the results at trial, this evidence would not have provided a defense to murder in the first degree. Voluntary cocaine intoxication is not a defense. [39] Moreover, the absence of Dr. Bernard's testimony did not prejudice Johnson in light of the overwhelming amount of evidence that Johnson did knowingly cause the deaths of the three victims after deliberation. This point is denied.