Mark David Johnson, Appellant v. State of Arkansas, Appellee

Summary

The court affirmed the denial of postconviction relief, holding that Johnson failed to establish ineffective assistance regarding the admission of testimony about alleged sexual abuse, the failure to call additional accident witnesses, or the advice leading to his negotiated guilty plea. The court concluded that the challenged testimony was relevant to motive and intent, that the proposed witnesses were cumulative or inadequately supported, and that the plea record showed a knowing and voluntary decision. Justice Hart, dissenting, would have reversed and remanded for a new sentencing proceeding because the testimony concerned an uncharged and unproven crime.