Opinion ID: 3049501
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: trial: defense’s witnesses and closing

Text: ARGUMENT AT PENALTY PHASE The defense called four witnesses. The defense’s plan was primarily to argue residual doubt (also called lingering doubt). Given there were no direct eyewitnesses to the murder, Lane believed lingering doubt would be paramount in the penalty phase. He stated, “Lingering doubt was the whole thing in this case. Without it, I didn’t see any hope.” Reverend Bobby Moye was the pastor of Johnson’s church and a friend of Johnson’s family. Rev. Moye testified that he had known Johnson since childhood and had baptized Johnson, and that Johnson was a “fine boy” who was “very kind” and “very involved in church.” On cross-examination, Rev. Moye stated that Johnson came to church as an adult, but Rev. Moye “could not accurately say how faithful he was or how dependable.” Reverend Jimmy O. Hall, Jr., Johnson’s middle-school physical education teacher, testified that Johnson was “one of the students that stood out” and was “very dutiful” and “a very good student as far as participation.” Johnson was “a pretty good student,” was “always cooperative,” and did not cause trouble. 15 Johnson “would always worry . . . about could I take the equipment out and that kind of thing. May I lead exercise, things of that nature, may I be captain of the team, things of that nature.” Rev. Hall sought out defense counsel and offered to testify on Johnson’s behalf “[b]ecause I knew Ray Johnson . . . because I feel he’s a good person.” Rev. Hall admitted he did not know Johnson as an adult. Brian Sherman, a friend of Johnson’s, testified about his common interests with Johnson: (1) Johnson was a cabinetmaker and Sherman appreciated Johnson’s artistry; and (2) Johnson and Sherman both enjoyed dancing. Sherman asked the jury not to sentence Johnson to death. Johnson’s mother, Rosemary Johnson, begged the jury “not [to] put [her] son to death.” Rosemary Johnson testified that her son’s arrest and trial had “destroyed [her] whole life . . . . I’ve had to carry the burden right by myself . . . and I have been right here with my child, and I will be with my child until my dying day. . . . Or to his dying day.” Lane spent most of his penalty-phase closing argument in an attempt to create lingering doubt. He told the jurors that although they decided Johnson was guilty, they “should not vote to kill Ray Johnson . . . because this is a circumstantial evidence death penalty murder case only.” Lane argued the jurors “should have some doubt, some doubt, whatever, ever so slight, whatever doubt, 16 some doubt.” Lane posed a number of hypothetical questions he argued that the State had not satisfactorily answered, and asked the jurors whether they were sure enough in their verdict, “so sure, sure enough based on this circumstantial evidence, to vote to take a human being’s life?” Lane emphasized that the death penalty is irreversible. Afterward, Lane argued that the State “would have you believe that [Sheffield] died as a result of this wound that he got on his head” but “[t]hey have no proof of that.” Lane pointed out that Sheffield had returned to work for the city and the county after the attack. Lane argued none of the State’s other penaltyphase evidence was sufficient to justify a death sentence. In Jones’s portion of the closing argument, he discussed Johnson’s life, emphasizing Johnson’s helpfulness as a child and his church attendance. Jones also argued that Dr. Rummel would not have seen Sheffield much after he received his head injury because Sheffield was working at the hospital through his capacity as a Miller County deputy, and he was “no longer in that capacity with the county” after Johnson’s escape. Johnson argued that the State’s suggestion that Johnson killed Sheffield was “a most tragic play on the facts” and “unfair.” Jones also plied a residual-doubt argument, telling the jury that the State’s case was circumstantial and that although the jury found Johnson guilty beyond a 17 reasonable doubt, “I’m begging you, before we execute this man, let us take that to a little higher level.” Jones asked the jury to consider the “unanswered questions during the course of the trial.”