Court Opinion

ID: 9477785
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 06:31:00.630629+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:46:02.611637
License: Public Domain

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING AND SUGGESTION FOR REHEARING EN BANC
PER CURIAM:
In his petition for rehearing, Leo E. Edwards contends that this court’s decision directly conflicts with the United States Supreme Court’s recent decision in Johnson v. Mississippi, — U.S.-, 108 S.Ct. 1981, 1985-87, 100 L.Ed.2d 575 (1988). Petitioner argues that Johnson requires that we vacate his sentence because of the erroneous admission of the misdemeanor conviction for carrying a concealed weapon in the sentencing phase of his trial. We disagree.
In Johnson, evidence of an earlier New York felony conviction for second degree assault with intent to commit first degree rape was admitted in the sentencing phase of the trial. This conviction was later vacated following the successful prosecution of post-conviction proceedings. In remanding Johnson’s case to the Mississippi Supreme Court for a new sentencing determination, the Supreme Court held: “It is apparent that the New York conviction provided no legitimate support for the death sentence imposed on petitioner. It is equal*213ly apparent that the use of that conviction in the sentencing hearing was prejudicial.” 108 S.Ct. at 1986-87. The Court further noted that: “Here the jury was allowed to consider evidence that has been revealed to be materially inaccurate.” 108 S.Ct. at 1989 (emphasis added).
The Court’s determination in Johnson that evidence of the earlier felony conviction was a material inaccuracy and operated to Johnson’s prejudice at his sentencing hearing distinguishes Johnson from the instant case. We remain convinced that “considering the extent of Edwards’ criminal record, it is inconceivable that the erroneously admitted misdemeanor conviction of carrying a concealed weapon affected the jury’s decision.” Panel op. at 211.
The application for panel rehearing is DENIED and no member of this panel nor judge in regular active service on the court having requested that the court be polled on rehearing en banc, (Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure and Local Rule 35) the suggestion for rehearing en banc is DENIED.