In re T.N.R.

Citations

• 2023 Ohio 85

Syllabus

Juvenile sufficiency of the evidence manifest weight of the evidence complicity motion to suppress videotaped statement Miranda rights coercion involuntary ineffective assistance of counsel. Judgment affirmed. The failure to file a suppression motion does not constitute per se ineffective assistance of counsel. Even when there is some evidence in the record to support a motion to suppress, an appellate court presumes that defense counsel was effective if defense counsel could reasonably have decided that the motion to suppress would have been futile. In the instant case, the indicia of involuntariness and coercion are not present. The appellant turned 18 years old a few days before she was arrested. She appeared coherent and stable in the video. She was conscious the entire time and did not slur her speech or appear to be under the influence of any medication or substance. The questioning by the officer lasted approximately 45 minutes. There is nothing to suggest that the appellant's state of mind was altered. The appellant was able to write her statement in a notepad. In addition, the officers did not prevent the appellant from receiving any medical treatment while questioning her. Therefore, we decline to find that the appellant's statement was involuntary or coerced based on the totality of the circumstances and the foregoing case law. We cannot say that a motion to suppress the statement would have been successful. Furthermore, there is sufficient evidence in the record to sustain appellant's convictions on a complicity theory and her conviction are not against the manifest weight of the evidence. The record demonstrates that the appellant was more than just merely present. She was aware of and involved in the theft of the victim. She initiated the marijuana sale and knew that a gun was involved, that cash was taken, and that the victim was assaulted. The appellant did not attempt to stop her boyfriend from entering the victim's car, nor did she try to leave.