Opinion ID: 789452
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Precipitating Actions by Defense Counsel

Text: 16 In his opening statement, Johnson's counsel announced that the defense theory was mistaken identity: I want to be very clear with you at the outset, what the defense's position is as to the first four sales [i.e., the crack sales] and that is, that this is a case of mistaken identity. Trial Tr. at 22. In support of this theory, defense counsel stated that Leotha Barrow's brother Jamal was the real perpetrator of the charged crimes: 17 [T]he guy on that tape, on August 15th, is not Calvin Johnson but Jamal Barrow, and the person who sold drugs to the undercover agent April 19th, 2001 was not Calvin Johnson, it was Jamal Barrow, the same person who is on that tape. And on May 15th it was Jamal Barrow not Calvin Johnson, the same person who is on the August 15th tape. 18 . . . And that's the person who also sold not only on August 15th, but also, August 22nd to the same undercover. 19 Id. at 22-23. 20 In cross-examining Det. Campana, defense counsel not only highlighted various discrepancies between the officer's testimony regarding the April 19, 2001 crack sale and his official report, he accused Det. Campana of fabricating his meeting with the confidential informant at 215 Schaefer Street on that date: You made up about meeting the C.I. there that day, didn't you? Trial Tr. at 124. 21