New Filings Allege Georgia Prosecutor Withheld Critical Evidence of Plea Deal with Co-Defendant from Warren King

Attorneys for Warren King (pictured), who was convicted and sentenced to death in Georgia in 1998 for the murder of a convenience store clerk, have uncovered evidence that shows the prosecutor, John B. Johnson, withheld critical evidence from Mr. King’s defense team at the time of trial. A new court filing indicates that ADA Johnson failed to disclose a plea deal reached with Mr. King’s co-defendant, Walter Smith, the only eyewitness to the crime. Both Mr. King and Mr. Smith were charged with the murder of Karen Crosby, but Mr. Smith avoided the death penalty and pled guilty to life in prison with the possibility for parole three years after Mr. King’s trial and conviction. During closing statements at Mr. King’s trial, ADA Johnson told jurors there were “no deals” in place for Mr. Smith, who also testified on cross-examination that there was no deal in place. In a new sworn statement from John Brewer III, one of Mr. Smith’s trial lawyers, he said that ADA Johnson agreed to recommend a life sentence with the possibility of parole, in exchange for Mr. Smith’s testimony against Mr. King. According to Mr. Brewer, ADA Johnson approached his client with a possible deal “several months before Mr. King’s trial.” Mr. Brewer added that he “would have never recommended Mr. Smith testify against Mr. King unless [he] knew for certain that he had a deal and would avoid the death penalty.”

Counsel for Mr. King should have been provided this information under longstanding legal precedent established by the United States Supreme Court in Brady v. Maryland (1963), which requires prosecutors to turn over all favorable evidence to the defense team. There is also an ethical obligation for prosecutors to do so. With proof of a deal in place for Mr. Smith, attorneys for Mr. King could have used this information to impeach Mr. Smith’s credibility as a witness. The filings say that the prosecution’s failure to disclose this deal “deprived Mr. King of a fair trial and produced the ultimate miscarriage of justice: an unreliable conviction and death sentence.”

At Mr. King’s trial, Mr. Smith testified that Mr. King was responsible for shooting Ms. Crosby and that Mr. King, after the shooting, said, “I hope I killed the b*tch.” Mr. King did not take the stand during the guilt-phase of his trial but testified during the sentencing phase. Mr. King told the jury that Mr. Smith had given him the gun and told him to shoot Ms. Crosby, but instead, he gave the gun back to Mr. Smith who then fired the fatal shots. Mr. King’s filings explain that Mr. Smith’s testimony is the only evidence pointing to Mr. King being the triggerman. Had Mr. Johnson disclosed the deal with Mr. King’s trial attorneys, they “would have been able to powerfully challenge Mr. Smith’s testimony by highlighting his motive to paint Mr. King, rather than himself, as the shooter, in order to save his life,” said the motion.

On July 2, 2024, the Supreme Court refused to hear claims that ADA Johnson improperly excluded Black jurors from Mr. King’s trial. Lower courts have upheld Mr. King’s conviction despite evidence showing that ADA Johnson struck 87.5% of eligible Black jurors, while striking just 8.8% of white jurors, who were all women. Consequently, a Black juror was ten times more likely to be excused than a white juror, and women were four times more likely to be excluded than men, according to the motion. The Supreme Court’s decision in Batson v. Kentucky (1986) prohibits attorneys from excluding potential jurors from service based on their race. At Mr. King’s trial, ADA Johnson provided race-neutral reasonings for his exclusion of Black jurors. Attorneys for Mr. King have uncovered handwritten notes from ADA Johnson which indicate he closely tracked which potential jurors were Black and which were women. Mr. King’s lawyers claim that these handwritten notes are “concrete proof that [ADA] Johnson was indeed considering race and gender” of potential jurors.