Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

449 So. 2d 225

Johnson v. State

Mississippi Supreme Court

Decided April 18, 1984

Mississippi Supreme Court · decided 1984-04-18

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently February 2004

2 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1984-04-18

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1ON MOTION FOR STAY OF ALL PROCEEDINGS IN THIS CAUSE

HAWKINS, Justice,

¶2for the Court:

¶3The appellant Samuel Bice Johnson on his own behalf filed in this Court a “Motion for Stay of All Proceedings in This Cause.” He is unhappy with the brief submitted by his own counsel. It is not clear whether he wants to simply add points of argument to the brief of his counsel, or make further adjustments in his defense line-up.

¶4Johnson is represented by an accredited lawyer, and it is upon the shoulders of his counsel that the responsibility rests for raising all appropriate appellate questions. This Court is neither going to substitute its own judgment for the judgment of Johnson’s counsel, nor remove from this attorney the responsibility of adequate representation. Furthermore, it would be unfair to require the state’s attorneys to respond to the myriad questions which can be dreamed up by an incarcerated individual, who is not an attorney.

¶5It is the duty and responsibility of counsel for Johnson to raise all appropriate questions. There being no lawful or Constitutional requirement that we do so, this Court is not going to wade off into a swamp of pro se ancillary briefs.

¶6MOTION OVERRULED.

PATTERSON, C.J., WALKER and ROY NOBLE LEE, P.JJ., and BOWLING, DAN M. LEE, PRATHER, ROBERTSON and SULLIVAN, JJ., concur.
/449/so2d/225 · .json · Public domain