Shannon Sheree Johnson v The State Of Oklahoma

F-2018-1004

Filed: Feb. 13, 2020

Not for publication

Prevailing Party: The State Of Oklahoma

Summary

Shannon Sheree Johnson appealed her conviction for violating conditions of her Mental Health Court program. The trial court terminated her participation in the program and sentenced her to prison. The original sentence was ten years for her new charges and a year for an old one, all to be served at the same time. Judge Kuehn agreed with the trial court's decision, while Judge Rowland disagreed.

Decision

The termination of Appellant's participation in the Mental Health Court program in Oklahoma County District Court Case Nos. CF-2013-2846, CF-2014-1596, CM-2015-1832, and CF-2015-8771 is AFFIRMED. Pursuant to Rule 3.15, Rules of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, Title 22, Ch.18, App. (2020), the MANDATE is ORDERED issued upon the filing of this decision.

Issues

• Was there an abuse of discretion by the Mental Health Court judge in terminating Appellant's participation in the program?
• Did the Mental Health Court judge properly consider the Appellant's conduct and inability to comply with program requirements?
• Was the termination of Appellant's participation in the Mental Health Court program justified based on her repeated failures and noncompliance?
• Did the court fail to recognize the statutory duty to acknowledge relapses as part of the rehabilitation and recovery process?
• Is the decision to impose the specified sentences in accordance with the plea agreement legally sound based on the facts presented?

Findings

• The court did not err in terminating Appellant's participation in the Mental Health Court program.
• The court did not abuse its discretion in imposing the sentence as specified in the Mental Health Court plea agreement.

F-2018-1004

Feb. 13, 2020

Shannon Sheree Johnson

Appellant

v

The State Of Oklahoma

Appellee

SUMMARY OPINION

KUEHN, VICE PRESIDING JUDGE:

On April 18, 2017, Appellant entered a plea of guilty in Oklahoma County District Case No. CF-2015-8771. The trial court delayed Appellant’s sentencing in Case No. CF-2015-8771 and suspended the probation requirements in Oklahoma County District Court Case Nos. CF-2013-2846, CF-2014-1596, and CM-2015-1832 pending successful completion of the Oklahoma County Mental Health Court program. The plea agreement stipulated that if unsuccessful in Mental Health Court the trial court would revoke Appellant’s suspended sentences in Case Nos. CF-2013-2846 and CF-2014-1596; accelerate Appellant’s deferred sentences to convictions and sentence Appellant to one year imprisonment in Case No. CM-2015-1832; and sentence Appellant to ten years imprisonment each for Counts 1 and 2 in Case No. CF-2015-8771. The sentences would be served concurrently.

The State filed an application seeking to terminate Appellant’s participation in the Mental Health Court program alleging Appellant failed to follow the rules of Mental Health Court, failed to progress in the program, left inpatient treatment without permission, and failed to graduate from inpatient treatment. Following a hearing on the State’s application, the Honorable Geary Walke, Special Judge, terminated Appellant’s participation in Mental Health Court and sentenced Appellant pursuant to her Mental Health Court plea agreement.

The decision to revoke or terminate from Mental Health Court lies within the discretion of the Mental Health Court judge. Tate v. State, 2013 OK CR 18, I 28, 313 P.3d 274, 282. An abuse of discretion is any unreasonable or arbitrary action taken without proper consideration of the facts and law pertaining to the matter at issue or a clearly erroneous conclusion and judgment, one that is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts presented. Tate, 2013 OK CR 18, I 28, 313 P.3d at 282-283.

Appellant argues Judge Walke’s termination order was an abuse of discretion because the trial court did not attempt additional intermediate sanctions. Appellant concluded Judge Walke should have sanctioned Appellant to six months in the county jail instead of sentencing Appellant pursuant to her Mental Health Court plea agreement in this case. Appellant maintains she is entitled to relief because she was sober for a period leading up to the termination hearing. Appellate counsel bases this argument on an unsolicited comment by Appellant to the trial court after Judge Walke made his ruling. The evidence before Judge Walke was that Appellant repeatedly missed court, missed meetings, missed UAs, failed UAs, and was AWOL from the mental health program. She wholly failed in her attempts to complete required treatment.

Appellant argues that because there were less severe punishment options available to Judge Walke, his decision was an abuse of discretion. Appellant argues that Judge Walke failed in his statutory duty to properly recognize relapses and restarts in the program which are considered to be part of the rehabilitation and recovery process. See 22 O.S.Supp.2014, § 472(F). In relying on Section 472(F), Appellant maintains Judge Walke’s decision conflicts with the spirit of the Anna McBride Act. Appellant ignores that pursuant to Section 472(F) it was within Judge Walke’s discretion to determine that instead of further intermediate sanctions, Appellant’s conduct requires revocation from the program. 22 O.S.Supp.2014, § 472(F).

Appellant has not established that this termination was clearly against the law or facts in this case, thus Appellant has not shown Judge Walke abused his discretion in terminating her from the Mental Health Court program and imposing the sentence as specified in the Mental Health Court plea agreement.

DECISION

The termination of Appellant’s participation in the Mental Health Court program in Oklahoma County District Court Case Nos. CF-2013-2846, CF-2014-1596, CM-2015-1832, and CF-2015-8771 is AFFIRMED. Pursuant to Rule 3.15, Rules of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, Title 22, Ch.18, App. (2020), the MANDATE is ORDERED issued upon the filing of this decision.

Click Here To Download PDF

Footnotes:

1. 22 O.S.Supp.2014, § 472(F).
2. 22 O.S.Supp.2014, § 472(F).
3. Rule 3.15, Rules of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, Title 22, Ch.18, App. (2020).

Oklahoma Statutes citations:

• Okla. Stat. tit. 22 § 472(F) (2014) - Mental Health Court

Oklahoma Administrative Rules citations:

No Oklahoma administrative rules found.

U.S. Code citations:

No US Code citations found.

Other citations:

No other rule citations found.

Case citations:

• Tate v. State, 2013 OK CR 18, I 28, 313 P.3d 274, 282