The appeals court did send a technical issue back to the U.S. District Court, but affirmed the rest of the case.
Johnson, 42, formerly of Clear Lake, Forest City and Klemme, was convicted for her part in the 1993 drug-related slayings of five people near Mason City.
She was found guilty of five counts of aiding and abetting murder while working in continuance of a criminal enterprise and five counts of aiding and abetting the killing of the individuals while engaging in a drug conspiracy.
The jury voted to impose eight death sentences and two life-in-prison sentences.
The Court of Appeals ruled that Johnson could not be convicted of both the drug conspiracy and continuing a criminal enterprise charges.
The court remanded the case to U.S. District Judge Mark Bennett so he may vacate the conspiracy conviction, which was a lesser charge. It reduces the number of guilty verdicts from 10 to five — four death sentences and one life in prison.
“This is clearly a win for the government,” said Assistant U.S. Attorney C.J. Williams, who was the prosecutor in the case.
“When we presented the case, it was presented with two different groups of elements. The jury agreed she was guilty of both groups of elements.”
Johnson and her boyfriend, Dustin Honken, were convicted of planning and carrying out the slayings of three adults and two children, and sentenced to death after separate federal trials.
They were convicted of killing two federal drug informants who once peddled methamphetamine produced by Honken.
One of the informants, Greg Nicholson of Mason City, disappeared in June 1993 along with his girlfriend, Lori Duncan, also of Mason City, and her two daughters, Kandace Duncan, 10, and Amber Duncan, 6.
The other informant, Terry DeGeus of Britt, disappeared months later.
Their bodies were discovered in two graves outside of Mason City during 2000 after Johnson gave information about the locations of the graves to a jailhouse informant.
Johnson is in federal prison in Fort Worth, Texas, appealing her conviction and death sentence.
Honken, in federal prison in Terre Haute, Ind., also has a pending appeal.
The Court of Appeals ruling was a 45-page response to 28 issues raised by Johnson’s attorneys.
Dean Stowers, a Des Moines attorney who presented the appeal, said he was disappointed in the ruling.
“Anything less than having the case overturned is a disappointment,” said Stowers.
He said typically there is a request for a rehearing. If the Court of Appeals denies the request, Johnson’s attorney’s will have 90 days to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
“I expect that will happen in this case,” said Stowers.
The Court of Appeals has allowed several motions for continuances in Honken’s hearing.
Deadline for filing the initial briefs in the appeal is Aug. 25.
| Post Your Comments On This Story |
Click here to create an account.
|
| Please submit your comment only once. Your comment will be posted immediately after submission. By submitting this form you agree to our Comment Policy & Privacy Policy. |
|
Comment Policy: (hide)
Globegazette.com encourages readers to engage in civil conversation with their neighbors. Comments that are submitted go into a queue to be moderated, and if posted after midnight, may take several hours before they appear on the site. We will not edit or alter your comments, but we do reserve the right to delete or refuse to post comments that violate our code of conduct. No comment may contain:
globegazette.com Privacy Policy: (hide)
Welcome to the web sites of the Globe Gazette, a media company located in eastern Iowa. We believe in your right to know what information is collected during your visit to our web sites and how the information is used and safeguarded. Information Gathered by Voluntary Submission To make use of certain features on our websites (such as contests, story comments, personalized web pages and other interactive forums) visitors need to register and to provide certain information as part of the registration or participation process. (We may ask, for example, for your name, email address, sex, age, and zip code, and we might request information on your interest in sports, personal finance, the performing arts, and the like.) The information you supply will help us to offer you more personalized features, to tailor our sites to your interests and make them more useful to you. The more you tell us about yourself, the more value we can offer you. Supplying such information is entirely voluntary. But if you don't supply the information we need, we may be unable to provide you with services we make available to other visitors to our sites. Of course, even if you want to remain completely anonymous, you're still free to take advantage of the wealth of content available on our sites without registration. Information Automatically Gathered About All Visitors We collect aggregate and user-specific information on what pages consumers access or visit. This information is used to generate reports that help the Globe Gazette assess the value of and interest in the various web sites. The information we collect is used by us to improve the content of our web page. We can build a better site if we know which pages our users are visiting and how often. Our web servers automatically collect limited information about your computer's connection to the Internet, including your IP address but not the e-mail address, when you visit our sites. Your IP address does not identify you personally. We use this information to deliver our web pages to you upon request, to tailor our sites to the interests of our users, and to measure traffic within our sites. To help make our sites more responsive to the needs of our visitors, we may utilize a standard feature of browser software, called a "cookie". The cookie doesn't actually identify the visitor, just the computer that a visitor uses to access our site. A cookie can't read data off your hard drive. Our advertisers or content partners may also assign their own cookies to your browser, a process that we cannot control. We use cookies to help us tailor our site to your needs, to deliver a better, more personalized service. It is a cookie, for example, that allows us to deliver your personalized stock quotes each time you visit a site. Information Shared With Other Organizations When we present information to our advertisers -- to help them understand our audience and confirm the value of advertising on our websites -- it is usually in the form of aggregated statistics on traffic to various pages within our sites. We will not share individual user information with third parties unless the user has specifically approved the release of that information. Special Attention to Children Children should always get permission from their parents before sending any information about themselves (such as their names, email addresses, and phone numbers) over the Internet, to us or to anyone else. We do not specifically collect information about children. We encourage parents to review and share safety tips with their children participating in the online experience. A final note: The Globe Gazette is affiliated with other online companies, some of which feature our branding. This policy statement does not apply to those companies' web sites; please refer to these affiliated sites to obtain information on their privacy policies. If you can't find the privacy policy of any of these sites via a link from the site's homepage, you should contact the site directly for more information. The Web is an evolving medium. If we need to change our privacy policy at some point in the future, we'll post the changes before they take effect. Of course, our use of information gathered while the current policy is in effect will always be consistent with the current policy, even if we change that policy later. (hide) Click here to report offensive or inappropriate comments. Please make sure to identify the comment you're concerned about, the story to which the comment was attached, the date of the comment and the person who made the post. |
|
The Globe Gazette provides our story commenting feature in order to solicit feedback, debate and discussion on topics of local interest. For an explanation of our policy of appropriate postings, please see our Rules of the Road. Thanks for reading, and thanks for participating.
Rules of the Road: (hide)
Blog administrators and moderators have the right to edit, delete, move or close any comment or forum at any time. The following rules and guidelines clarify our practices and provide an explanation of what content may lead to message deletion and/or user bans. Play nice: Messages containing intentionally misleading information, defamatory content, threats, verbal abuse, harassment, obscenity or personal information about other individuals are not allowed. Comments should be brief and stick to either generally known facts or the facts contained in a news story. Keep a civil tone. Resist making personal attacks or indulging in name-calling. If your item doesn't get posted or is deleted, tone it down a bit and try again. Keep your posts commercial-free: Advertisements, chain letters, pyramid schemes and solicitations are unacceptable. Spam is not allowed: Spamming includes multiple disruptive, meaningless or repetitive messages, or messages posted solely for solicitation. Messages considered spam, trolling or flaming (as determined by the sole discretion of the moderator) can be deleted without warning or explanation. User Accounts: Registered user names must follow the same rules as forum posts. Any user accounts considered objectionable or created for the purpose of spamming or promoting commercial interests may be deleted. Deliberate or continued abuse of user accounts will result in a ban of the user's IP address. Signatures: All content posted in the user's signature field must follow the same rules as forum messages and user accounts. Fair Use: Do not post entire articles into comments or forums. This is a potential violation of copyright laws. It's unnecessary and results in needlessly long posts. Instead, post a brief abstract of the material and a link to the complete source. If you are not sure how much of an article you can legally post, please simply post a link to the material. Don't see a message you posted earlier? Administrators may move messages to more relevant forums. If you recently posted a message and cannot find it anywhere, the message may have been deleted because of objectionable content. Feel free to try again or contact the moderator for details. What to do if your account has been banned: If you try to login and receive a message that you've been banned, do not immediately open another user account and continue the inappropriate behavior. Such action could result in a permanent ban. Instead, contact the administrator and find out what caused the sanction. We may or may not reinstate your privileges after such a contact. (hide) |
| Showing The Last 11 comment(s) Comments On This Story |
KenS wrote on Aug 1, 2007 12:12 AM: " Former Iowegian said:"but lets be sure, they are in fact guilty based on evidence for those crimes, not hearsay, on which she was convicted in a biased court. "
Hearsay is not admissible in any court. And if there had been any evidence of that, the appeals process would have pointed that out. However they did not take exception.
What is the nature of this so-called bias? Were claims of bias brought before the Appeals Court?
" KenS wrote on Aug 1, 2007 12:05 AM: " Former Iowegian, I guess your reading skills need some improvement. I shall again quote the article: "The Court of Appeals ruled that Johnson could not be convicted of both the drug conspiracy and continuing a criminal enterprise charges."
In any event, she has been found guilty of killing people as part of a drug selling operation she helped run. If the conspiracy verdict is vacated, she will still face the death penalty for killing people while helping run an operation to sell illegal drugs.
Then you ask: "Now how is that fair and unbiased!? " Because it is the law perhaps? Those who commit acts of violence in the course of running a drug operation face those consequences.
You speak of fairness? What about the lives she took from other people? Was that "fair"? " Former Iowegian wrote on Jul 31, 2007 9:12 PM: " Let me reverse the tables, "JUST HOW DO YOU KNOW ANGIE WANTS TO DIE!?" Did she tell you that in one of her letters? Easy to check out...how would you know?, run in the same circles did ya? You sound like you may be a little bit unobjective, perhaps jealous, she took your spotlight at more than one party. Yeah you know what and where I am talking about. Yes, I do know her! " violetnativemama wrote on Jul 31, 2007 7:52 PM: " to iowegian do you know Angie Johnson? She's known for many things and none of which would be the coconspirator or the docile compliant girlfriend. Docile does not threaten to kill a judge. Compliant does not participate in the death of little girls while your own is home snuggled in bed safely. Does it just not bother you ..who'd she kill first? Did a little child see her mother murdered / Which child saw her sister die. The worst part is Angie wants to die. The way to hurt Angie is to live and have a good time knowing she can no longer be the life of the party. Her kids will live fine without her and that gnaws at her something fierce. " Former Iowegian wrote on Jul 31, 2007 4:41 PM: " Bias! Yes, proven by her sentence, tried as a coconspirator, she received a tougher sentence that the main proprietor of the crime. Now how is that fair and unbiased!? " violetnativemama wrote on Jul 31, 2007 3:29 PM: " My family's thoughts are with the DeGeus family and Jeannie Johnson as another front page article sensationalizing this gruesome murder once again reminds these poor families of how their lives were changed forever 13YEARS AGO! Reading of Angie's own desire to be a famous hit woman this front page notoriety is just what she's always wanted. Why couldn't it make a small paragraph near the obits? " yumpin yimminy wrote on Jul 31, 2007 2:26 PM: " Lets think about it,,,,, a "fair trial"? Well lets see they gave her a trial and there was a man there that told them where SHE said the bodies where and she got convicted. If that aint fair I dont know what is. Maybe if she wouldnt have bragged in jail she would have gotten a "fair" trial. " OMG wrote on Jul 31, 2007 1:23 PM: " To Former Iowegian, how do you know that she didn't get a fair trial and that the jurors are biased? Do you personally know these jurors? I doubt it. I say that I wasn't the one to have to decide her fate and the people who did, that was their decision. Obviously they have their reasons and it is not for you (nor me) to question that. They jury felt she had part in the murder of 5 people so Angela should take her "lumps" and not waste anymore taxpayer time and money to appeal something she was involved in one way or another. Same for Dustin Honken. He had involvement, take your punishment. " Former Iowegian wrote on Jul 31, 2007 11:54 AM: " This is great news, now she can get proper representation! Maybe even a fair trial, hard to do in an area of such biased people. I can understand making someone pay for their crimes, but lets be sure, they are in fact guilty based on evidence for those crimes, not hearsay, on which she was convicted in a biased court. " jgerman wrote on Jul 31, 2007 8:07 AM: " Good glad to hear. She deserves what she'll get. " Bud wrote on Jul 31, 2007 6:25 AM: " I still say they'll die of old age before the executioner ever sees them. " |
| Show 10 latest comments only |





