The Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, just issued its decision in the case of Robin Wright-Jones v. Connie L. Johnson, an appeal from the city of St. Louis involving a challenge to the validity of Rep. Johnson’s candidacy for the senate.

In a 3-0 decision, the Eastern District affirmed the trial court’s decision in favor of Rep. Wright-Jones.

*Wright-Jones is running against Rodney Hubbard, a client of PubDef.net publisher Antonio D. French

A circuit court judge ruled last Wednesday that State Rep. Connie Johnson cannot appear on the ballot as a candidate for state senate because she doesn’t meet the residency requirement.

Johnson was sued by State Rep. Robin Wright-Jones, another candidate for the 5th District senate seat. Johnson’s removal would make the August 5th contest a two-person race, between Wright-Jones and the frontrunner, State Rep. Rodney Hubbard.*

But not so fast! Johnson says she plans to appeal the judge’s decision. This statement comes from her attorney, Rufus Tate:

We are disappointed. However, Representative Johnson is a lawmaker. Ultimately, she believes in the rule of law and judicial restraint. Therefore, I have been instructed to proceed with a notice of appeal, request to stay the circuit court order, and a request for an expedited appeal, including oral arguments.

Our legal position has not changed. Representative Johnson is and has always been a resident of the 61st legislative district; she has never abandoned her domicile at 5969 Tara Lane. To suggest that Rep. Johnson would have purchased this house on Maple for any reason other than to accommodate her mother’s increasing medical needs is to ignore incontrovertible evidence. We wouldn’t be having this conversation but for pressing medical needs of her mother.

Juxtaposing the Supreme Court ruling in the “Kit” Bond case and the Court of Appeal’s decision in the Jennings city councilman case with this one causes us concern.

We are also very concerned with whether the circuit court exceeded its jurisdiction to hear the matter. Section 115.531 RSMo required a hearing to begin not later than April 29, 2008. That did not happen because the Contestant was not ready to try the case. That unreadiness should have proven decisive for the Contestant in the circuit court. The law is plain and unambiguous. When you file a primary election contest petition, you better be ready to go to trial immediately. That is not open to debate.

The process has been taxing emotionally and financially. Justice has been too long delayed. We do not feel that the matter of jurisdiction has been sufficiently addressed so far. Therefore, we will have to wait a little while longer for justice in either the Court of Appeals, Eastern District or the Supreme Court.

UPDATE: This response comes from the other party in the case, Robin Wright-Jones:

Yesterday, Missouri Circuit Judge Russell Long issued the ruling that Representative Connie Johnson, because of Representative Johnson’s residency in the 5th Senatorial District was not
established that she shall be removed from the ballot as a candidate for Senator of the Missouri’s
5th Senatorial District. Judge Long’s ruling was based on the evidence presented during the trial.
This ruling is a victory for the people of Missouri and the 5th Senatorial District.

I am strongly committed to representing the values of those that live and work in the district.
There is absolutely no room in our government, and particularly with our elected officials, for
misdeeds, deception or fraud. This is particularly true where the standard for those working in the
corridors of the institutions where laws are proposed and passed should meet the highest morale
principles. I promise that I will meet and even exceed the highest principles possible. I will not
engage in any behavior that will sullen the image of my office or negatively diminish my ability to
do my work on behalf of my constituents. I invite all the other candidates running for public office,
particularly the other candidate running for Missouri’s 5th Senatorial District office to do the same.

Upon being elected to the Senate, I will preserve that integrity with fair and honest
representation. It’s time now to run this primary race.

*Hubbard is a client of PubDef.net publisher, Antonio D. French

The scene in the courtroom Friday was, at times, surreal.

At one point, State Rep. Robin Wright-Jones, who is suing State Rep. Connie Johnson for misrepresenting that she does live in the 5th Senatorial District, which they are both seeking to represent in the August 5th primary, took the stand to “play the part” (meaning she was reading the testimony of another witness taken during a previous deposition) of the man who rented the home Johnson claims is her residence.

Johnson listened as Wright-Jones read in the first-person allegations that she slashed the car tires of one of her tenants, then stole a pair of boots, allegedly saying “I am going to have to get gangsta on this girl. She doesn’t know who I am.”

Johnson denies the allegations of William Keys, a firefighter who claims that he rented Johnson’s northside house with an agreement to purchase it with his girlfriend, who also lived there. Johnson has said that the arrangement was actually more of a roommate agreement, with her being able to come and go when not in Jefferson City fulfilling her duties or at another home she owned in Central West End taking care of her ailing mother.

In his deposition, read in court by Wright-Jones, Keys denied that description of the arrangement. “Where would she sleep? There were only two mattresses.” he said.

Further damaging is the fact that the house has been condemned by the city since December or January. According to Susan Block, attorney for Robin Wright-Jones, Representative Johnson just applied for an occupancy permit this month.

Johnson has called Wright-Jones lawsuit a desperate political move. She also points out that Wright-Jones entire case almost completely mirrors the evidence anonymously sent to election officials and several media outlets weeks before she filed her suit.

Wright-Jones denied on the stand that she had any knowledge of that anonymous packet.

More may be at stake for Connie Johnson than just being allowed to stay on the ballot or not. Wright-Jones is also seeking attorney fees and costs, which already total to more than $17,000. The U.S. Attorney’s office also requested a copy of the St. Louis Board of Elections findings and a representative from the Missouri Attorney General’s office was in court Friday monitoring the case.

Friday’s proceedings, which started at 9:30 AM, lasted until 7:30 PM.

Judge Douglas Long of Pulaksi County, the third judge in the case following the recusal of two others because of possible conflicts of interest, has requested additional documents from Wright-Jones’ attorney by midweek. A verdict may be announced by Thursday or Friday.