Joliet Serial Killer Milton Johnson Loses Another Appeal

JOLIET, IL — Joliet resident Milton Johnson has spent most of his life living behind the walls of a maximum security prison because he is a notorious convicted serial killer. These days, Johnson lives at Menard Correctional Center. At one of his murder trials, Will County prosecutor Stephen White pointed at the defendant and told the jury Johnson was an animal.

This month, Joliet Patch has learned, the 68-year-old Johnson got some more bad news, but most people familiar with mass murderer Milton Johnson will be happy.

The Third District Appellate Court has issued an 11-page ruling in Johnson's latest postconviction petition, turning it down. The issues in front of the judges surround the post-conviction appeal that dates all the way back to Nov. 23, 1987, court documents note.

During his early thirties, Johnson was convicted of murdering 18-year-old Anthony Hackett and raping Hackett's girlfriend, then stabbing her in the stomach and leaving her for dead, south of Joliet, near Wilmington, on July 17, 1983. At his second murder trial, Johnson served as his own criminal defense attorney, the August 1983 quadruple murders inside the Greenware By Merry ceramic shop at 1405 E. Cass St. in Joliet.

All four women were fatally stabbed and one of the victims, 75-year-old Anna Ryan, was also shot. Their purses were also taken.

Johnson was sentenced to die in the 1980s for a total of five murders. He was also suspected of committing several more murders during the summer of 1983, but Will County State's Attorney Edward Petka selected the I-55 murder and the ceramic shop murders as the best cases to bring against Johnson at that point in time.

Here are some key excerpts from this month's ruling by the Illinois appeals court out of the Third District that went against Johnson.

• "Defendant contends that the circuit court erred in denying his postconviction petition following an evidentiary hearing. Specifically, defendant contends that he established that defense counsel provided ineffective assistance for failing to move to bar or rebut the State’s expert witness who opined as to the origin of the bullets recovered from Hackett’s body and the cartridges recovered from defendant’s residence. Upon review, we find the court did not err in denying defendant’s postconviction petition, because defendant failed to establish prejudice resulting from counsel’s purported deficient performance."
• "To prevail on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, a defendant must demonstrate that (1) counsel’s performance fell below an objective standard of reasonableness, and (2) the deficient performance prejudiced the defense. Even assuming defense counsel performed deficiently, we find that defendant cannot demonstrate that there is a reasonable probability that the result would have been different because the evidence of defendant’s guilt is overwhelming."
• Given that the evidence of defendant’s guilt is overwhelming without even considering (FBI special agent Roger) Peele’s expert testimony, any attempt by defense counsel to challenge the forensic evidence would have had no impact on the jury’s determination. At best, the potential rebuttal testimony would have demonstrated that it was impossible to state with certainty that the bullets recovered from Hackett’s body and the cartridges found in defendant’s residence came from the same box. The rebuttal evidence would not show that the bullets came from different boxes. In other words, the defense’s expert testimony would merely negate Peele’s testimony. Consequently, we hold that it is not reasonably probable that the outcome of the trial would have been different."