State v. Cook

Citations

• 2020 Ohio 2844

Syllabus

Appellant's conviction of aggravated burglary was supported by sufficient evidence and not against the manifest weight of the evidence where the victim testified she was face-to-face with the burglar for a period of three to five seconds in the well-lit landing outsider her front door, and she subsequently identified appellant as the burglar from a photographic lineup. The fact that the victim inadvertently viewed a telephone screen shot of the suspect from a law enforcement website did not create a danger that the victim would subsequently misidentify appellant as the burglar because the victim testified the screen shot photograph was of poor quality compared to the view she had of appellant at the crime scene and viewing the screen had no impact on her subsequent identification of appellant from the photographic lineup. Appellant's conviction of receiving stolen property was supported by sufficient evidence and not against the manifest weight of the evidence where a store security video taken hours after the burglary showed appellant and an unidentified female using the victim's stolen credit card in an attempt to purchase merchandise. Judgment affirmed.