HOPPER, WARDEN

v.

JOHNSON, AKA BROOKS

Citator

Cited By

• Barham v. United States, 724 F.2d 1529 (11th Cir. 1984)
  …d that an actual conflict cannot be harmless “except under the most extraordinary circumstances”. Baty, 661 F. 2d at 395; Turnquest v. Wainwright, 5 Cir.1981, 651 F. 2d 331, 334; Johnson v. Hopper, 5 Cir.1981, 639 F. 2d 236, 239, cert. denied, 1981, 454 U.S. 1010, 102 S.Ct. 548, 70 L.Ed.2d 412. These cases have not discussed what circumstances would rise to the level of “extraordinary”, and the Court has never before actually invoked this exception, but I believe that “extraordinary circumstances” are presen…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• Son H. Fleming v. Kemp, 748 F.2d 1435 (11th Cir. 1984)
  …inly contradict those made by the petitioner. Moreover, it is clear from the two defendants’ statements that each was seeking to incriminate the other in order to exculpate himself. Cf. Johnson v. Hopper, 639 F. 2d 236, 237 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1010, 102 S.Ct. 548, 70 L.Ed.2d 412 (1981); Foxworth, 516 F. 2d at 1077 (where no one other than defendants witnessed murder, substantial possibility that one defendant would further own defense by placing sole responsibility on another). Thus, in a sta…
• United States v. Punch, 722 F.2d 146 (5th Cir. 1983)
  …75, 488, 98 S.Ct. 1173, 1180, 55 L.Ed.2d 426 (1978). See also Johnson v. Hopper, 639 F. 2d 236 (5th Cir.) (trial court should have granted defense counsel’s initial request for separate counsel when counsel claimed potential conflict), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1010, 102 S.Ct. 548, 70 L.Ed.2d 412 (1981); Scott v. United States, 598 F. 2d 392, 393 (5th Cir.1979). III. EVIDENCE OF EXTRINSIC OFFENSES. On direct examination Agent Herring testified that during his discussions with Punch, Punch told him that one of…