NORTH CAROLINA IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE

COUNTY OF ROCKINGHAM SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION

15 CRS 51934

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

MOTION FOR APPROPRIATE

VS. RELIEF

GARCIA FEN WICK JOHNSON

Defendant

NOW COMES the Defendant, Garcia Fenwick Johnson, by and through his
Attorneys Jason Ross and Scott Skidmore pursuant to N.C.G. S. 15A, N.C.G.S 15A-
1411, N.C.G.S. 15A-1415, the United States Constitution and the North Carolina
Constitution moving the Court for Appropriate Relief and as grounds for said Motion,
the Defendant shows unto the Court the following:

1. The Defendant was indicted by the Rockingham County Grand Jury and charged
with (F) AWDWIKISI on May 2, 2016.

2. That the case was prosecuted exclusively by the former elected District Attorney
of prosecutorial 17A, Craig Blitzer.

3. That the Counsel for the Defendant after indictment requested discovery from Mr.
Blitzer.

4. That Counsel for the Defendant was provided no cd discs from Mr. Blitzer
throughout the life of the case as part of the statutorily required mandate.

5. That upon information and belief officers of the Reidsville Police Department
executed a search warrant at the business of the defendant (Johnson and Sons
Funeral Home) and were assisted by officers with federal jurisdiction on or about
October 15, 2015.

6. That during that search evidence was seized allegedly that Mr. Blitzer contended
related to potential federal crimes.

7. That Mr. Blitzer then informed the defendant that if he did not accept a plea to
state charges that he would be indicted on "federal Charges".
8. That Mr. Blitzer never provided the defendant with any evidence seized by
federal agents in conjunction with the Reidsville Police Depaitment.

9. That fearing a federal indictment, the Defendant pled guilty to (F) AWDW
inflicting serious injury, (F) forgery and (F) notary violation on January 30, 2017.

10. That the defendant was sentenced to minimum term of 31 months and a maximum
term of 50 months in the North Carolina Department of Adult Corrections where
he is currently being held.

11. That Mr. Blitzer was investigated by the North Carolina State Bureau of
Investigation for crimes committed while in office.

12. That Mr. Blitzer has resigned his office as District Attorney of Rockingham
County and has subsequently pled guilty to offenses related to his work as District
Attorney of Rockingham County.

13. That Tom Keith was appointed by the Governor of North Carolina as the interim
District Attorney of Rockingham.

14. That upon information and belief Tom Keith has begun an internal review of all
cases handled by former District Attorney Blitzer.

15. That upon information and belief, the defendants' case was flagged for review by
Mr. Keith.

16. That the Greensboro News and Record (newspaper) and the local defense bar
were provided a list of names by Mr. Keith of defendants wherein Mr. Blitzer
may have potentially committed some type of legal/ethical error while
prosecuting the cases.

17. That the Greensboro News and Record printed a story on March 3, 2018 based on
information provided directly to them by the interim DA (Tom Keith); the
defendant, Garcia Fenwick Johnson, was a major focal point of the story.

18. As part of that news article, the defendant's picture that was taken when he was
arrested was included in the story.

19. That upon information and belief, current prosecutors in Judicial 17A has
uncovered other cases in which discovery violations and other issues may have
occurred as a result of the conduct of Mr. Blitzer.

20. That Counsel for the defendant has previously requested discovery in the above-
captioned matter of the entire case file in the possession of the prosecutorial
agency upon their initial representation of the defendant.
21. That as a result of the discovery of possible violations in other criminal cases
handled by Mr. Blitzer and the defendant being on the "list" provided to the local
defense bar, counsel for the defendant re-opened the defendant's case.

22. That in March of 2018, counsel for defendant personally reviewed the defendant's
case file that was in the possession of Rockingham County District Attorney's
office. Upon review, counsel discovered there were multiple discs (at least 9) in
the case file that were not provided to the defendant or his counsel prior to the
entry of his guilty plea on January 30, 2017.

23. That the term "file" shall include the defendant's statement, co-defendant's
statements, any witness statements, any investigating officers' notes, results of
tests or examinations and any other matter or evidence obtained during the
investigation of the offenses alleged to have been committed by the defendant.

24. That full discovery has now been provided to Counsel for the defendant by the
Interim District Attorney, Tom Keith, by and through his staff

25. That a review of this discovery reveals what Counsel for the defendant believes to
be exculpatory/Brady evidence that should have been turned over to the defendant
prior to trial.

26. This evidence includes but is not limited to; a photograph that was taken by
investigators at the scene that shows the alleged victim lying on the floor holding
a weapon "firearm" in his hand when law enforcement officer arrived on the
scene.

27. That information would have given the defendant the opportunity to assert the
affirmative defense of "self-defense" at trial. The withholding of this exculpatory
evidence by the State was a severe violation of the rights of the defendant.

28. That the State also withheld the video statement of the alleged victim in which he
stated that he did not want to go forward with the prosecution of the defendant.

29. That the alleged victim didn't show up to the defendant's sentencing hearing.

30. That upon information and belief, Mr. Blitzer didn't file any documents
(Defendant's Certificate of Receipt for Discovery) in the official court file (15
CRS 51934) in the Rockingham County Clerk of Superior Court office indicating
that he provided any of this exculpatory evidence to the Defendant which was the
normal process for the Rockingham County District Attorney's office during the
period for which Mr. Blitzer was the chief prosecutor.

31. That during the month of March 2018, Counsel for the Defendant spoke by phone
to a representative of the United States Attorney office for the Middle District of
North Carolina who was involved in the defendant's case.
32. That upon information and belief that office had not opened up an active
investigation of the defendant as was indicated by Mr. Blitzer to the Defendant.

33. That upon information and belief, a federal grand jury had not been impaneled to
ascertain if viable charges could be brought against the defendant at the federal
level.

34. That the defendant relied upon the statement by Blitzer that "he would be indicted
federally if he did not accept a plea in State Court."

35. That the defendant was told that he would have to accept the plea offer of Mr.
Blitzer by the date he signed the transcript of plea or face the possibility of federal
charges that didn't cover the pending state charges.

36. That upon information and belief, the "threat" made by Blitzer was a tactic used
to coerce the Defendant into entering a plea of guilty.

37. That upon information and belief, Mr. Blitzer used that same tactic with other
defendants in Rockingham County to force them into taking pleas in an expedited
fashion.

38. That had the exculpatory evidence been provided that the defendant would have
been afforded the opportunity to weigh going to trial and asserting the claim of
self-defense.

39. That when requested by counsel for defendant on the date the plea was entered by
the defendant, Mr. Blitzer refused to include any information or language
regarding the federal agreement in the Transcript of Plea that was prepared by Mr.
Blitzer.

40. That upon information and belief, Mr. Blitzer is now a cooperating witness for the
State of North Carolina against his co-defendant, Wallace Bradsher, former
District Attorney of Caswell County, North Carolina.

WHEREFORE, the Defendant pray§ the Court:

1. To set aside the judgment in the above-matter;

2. To order a new trial in the above-matter;

3. To order a new sentencing hearing, or

4. To Dismiss with prejudice due to extraordinary discovery violation or;

5. To otherwise suspend judgment in this matter as justice may require.

This the day of March 2018.

Jason Ross
Attorney for Defendant
NC Bar #22300
P.O. Box 2523
Reidsville, N.0 27323-2523
336-342-7844

Scott Skidmore
Attorney for Defendant
NC Bar #19284
P.0, Box 899
Reidsville, N.C. 27323-2523
336-349-4364