State v. John

310 Neb. 958

969 N.W.2d 894

STATE of Nebraska, appellee,

v.Isacc JOHN, appellant.

No. S-21-118.

Supreme Court of Nebraska.

Filed February 18, 2022

Kenneth Jacobs, of Hug and Jacobs, L.L.C., for appellant.

Douglas J. Peterson, Attorney General, and Kimberly A. Klein, for appellee.

Heavican, C.J., Miller-Lerman, Cassel, Stacy, Funke, Papik, and Freudenberg, JJ.

Funke, J.

INTRODUCTION

Isacc John appeals his convictions and sentences for first degree murder and use of a deadly weapon, not a firearm, to commit a felony. John asserts that, as the trier of fact, the district court for Douglas County erred in finding he did not prove his insanity defense. Further, John asserts trial counsel was ineffective in waiving his right to jury trial and in stipulating to the underlying facts of the killing. Finding no merit to the appeal, we affirm John's convictions and sentences.

BACKGROUND

On December 12, 2015, officers with the Omaha Police Department were called to Linda Chase's residence in Omaha, Nebraska. At that location, the officers found Chase deceased in the bathtub. Her body had extensive stab wounds, but the officers found little blood within the home. Officers did find some blood spatter in the kitchen and on the stairs and reported the smell of cleaning products. A rug with deep bloodstains was found in the dryer.

The officers learned that Chase shared her residence with John and issued a "locate warrant" for John. In response to the warrant, officers advised that they had interacted with John near 40th and Dodge Streets, concerning a call of individuals’ smoking marijuana in a business, and that John would still be in that area. Upon arrival, a sergeant investigating the case observed John was wearing shorts with "red staining." John had bloodshot eyes and was emotional, angry, screaming, and crying. Chase's family mentioned that John was a user of methamphetamine. Officers took John to the hospital to have his vitals checked and then to "[c]orrections" for the night.

Pursuant to a search warrant for Chase's home, officers found a large, bent kitchen knife, scissors, and other items with blood and hair on them. Based on the small amount of blood found, officers concluded that whoever had killed Chase had taken the time to clean up the crime scene and Chase's body. Officers collected cleaning bottles from the kitchen and basement.

On January 11, 2016, John was charged with first degree murder and use of a deadly weapon, not a firearm, to commit a felony. Pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-1823 (Reissue 2016), John requested that the court determine his competency to stand trial. The court held hearings regarding John's competency on January 17 and February 17, 2017.

John adduced testimony from Dr. Bruce Gutnik, who authored a report in April 2016 finding that John was not competent to stand trial based upon a 1-hour-45-minute evaluation, as well as a review of police reports and Chase's autopsy results. Gutnik examined John's intellectual and cognitive functions and found he suffered from a flat affect, loose associations, hallucinations, and delusions. Gutnik opined that John met all the criteria for schizophrenia. Though Gutnik opined that John was not competent to stand trial, he further opined that under appropriate treatment, John could become competent within a reasonable time.

Gutnik conducted a second evaluation of John, lasting approximately 1 hour 50 minutes, and he opined in September 2016 that John was still not competent to stand trial. Gutnik stated he did not observe John to be malingering, reasoning he had improved from taking the antipsychotic medication Zyprexa, which improvement John would not have been able to fake.

At the request of the State, John's competency was also evaluated by mental health professionals at the Lincoln Regional Center. Forensic psychiatrist Dr. Klaus Hartmann authored a report in July 2016 indicating further evaluation and observation of John was necessary due to concerns he was malingering, or faking symptoms of a mental illness. Following an extended evaluation, Hartmann found no indication that John was confused, disorganized, or acting in a bizarre or odd fashion. Hartmann found John had exaggerated his symptoms and had been uncooperative with the evaluation, which indicated a serious likelihood of malingering. Regarding John's Zyprexa prescription, Hartmann stated the medication was not necessary and would not have much effect on John other than to cause weight gain. Hartmann submitted a report in August which opined that John was malingering and competent to stand trial.

Due to delayed proceedings, each medical expert completed an additional evaluation of John, and in January 2017, they submitted reports generally consistent with their previous findings.

In April 2017, the court entered an order finding John competent to stand trial. The court noted that the experts had presented diametrically opposing views on the issue of John's competency. The court adopted the opinion of Hartmann, noting that in addition to the January 2017 evaluation, the professionals at the Lincoln Regional Center had the benefit of evaluating John from July 12 to August 16, 2016. The court was further persuaded by the assessments of John's treating psychiatrist, as well as the evaluations of clinical psychologist Dr. Sherri Browning. Browning found John provided vague answers to standard questioning, such as claiming he was hearing voices, but being unable to describe the voices, what they said, or the last time he heard them. Browning stated that it is out of the ordinary for a patient to provide vague descriptions of symptoms, because "[u]sually when patients are hearing voices, they can tell me exactly what the voices are saying ...." Browning further explained that "[u]sually when folks are experiencing psychiatric symptoms, these symptoms are very painful and very frightening and scary. And he was not experiencing any emotional distress when talking about the symptoms." Browning believed that John was malingering because, despite no history of mental illness, John claimed he had these symptoms for a long time. Through subsequent evaluations, Browning noted John's description of his symptoms changed and became inconsistent.

The court accepted Browning's diagnosis that John was malingering based on test results and the lack of signs of mental illness exhibited by John over the extended evaluation. Browning testified that John

was doing well at the regional center. We weren't hearing from staff that he was having — that they were observing him experiencing any symptoms. The staff were reporting that he was completing his activities of daily living without any problems, attending groups without any problems.

They hadn't observed him experiencing any symptoms of mental illness, meaning they didn't see him talking to the voices or talking to people that weren't there. They didn't visibly see him being depressed or crying. He seemed to be — based on the reports I received, that he was doing well.

The court found "sufficient evidence that ... John has the capacity to understand the nature and object of the proceedings against him, to comprehend his own condition in reference to such proceedings, and to make a rational defense."

John waived his right to a jury trial, and the matter proceeded to a bench trial. Evidence as to the underlying facts of the killing was submitted through stipulated reports and photographs. Live witnesses were called as to John's insanity defense.

John called as a witness his former attorney, who testified that on December 11, 2015, John caused a disturbance in the lobby of her office. John was laughing hysterically and talking in a manner she was unable to understand. John's former attorney testified that when she informed John she may need to call security, he "curl[ed] up into a ball" and started crying. She also testified that John did not smell like alcohol or marijuana.

Gutnik testified regarding each of his evaluations. Gutnik testified regarding John's blunted affect and rapid speech. When asked about what happened the night of Chase's killing, John told Gutnik he was drunk and high on marijuana, which might have been laced with another drug. However, laboratory results showed only "THC" in John's bloodstream at the time of his arrest. Gutnik diagnosed John with schizophrenia, alcohol and cannabis use disorder, and a possible schizoaffective disorder. Gutnik's subsequent reports indicated that John showed symptoms of schizophrenia, such as "talk[ing] to the television." Gutnik opined in his January 2017 report that John suffered from schizophrenia and was not malingering. Gutnik opined that on December 12, 2015, John stabbed and killed Chase while suffering from schizophrenia and "responding to the world based on hallucinations and delusions." Gutnik opined John did not understand the nature and consequences of his actions and did not understand the difference between right and wrong.

John called as a witness Dr. Kirk Newring, a licensed psychologist. Newring testified, based on his two evaluations of John, that he did see some signs of malingering, but to an extent that would be typical. Newring conducted the same malingering test as used by Browning and found John made no attempt to malinger. Newring found that John's behavior prior to the killing was consistent with schizophrenia. Newring, like Gutnik, opined John was experiencing schizophrenia at the time of the killing and was unable to appreciate the nature and consequences of his conduct and could not tell the difference between right and wrong.

The State adduced testimony from Hartmann and Dr. Jennifer Cimpl Bohn. On June 11, 2020, Hartmann and Cimpl Bohn evaluated John to determine whether he was insane at the time of the killing. Hartmann opined John was not insane at the time of the killing and was malingering. Hartmann stated John did not appear to be psychotic, but, rather, he could speak in an articulate and...