State v. Dyer

Citations

• 2024 Ohio 3421

Syllabus

Defense counsel's joint representation of appellant and his co-defendant, who were jointly indicted for the same incident, did not deny appellant his right to effective assistance of counsel. The interests of appellant and his co-defendant were not incompatible, the trial court reviewed the waiver of conflict of interest with appellant prior to trial, and the record does not demonstrate an actual conflict of interest. Defense counsel's alleged egregious conduct in voir dire, opening statement, and cross-examination of the State's witnesses was a matter of trial strategy, and prejudice is not demonstrated. Moreover, the jury is presumed to have followed the court's instructions to disregard \editorializing\ by defense counsel and that counsel's statements and arguments were not evidence. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to admit irrelevant evidence of the victim's prior speeding record. Appellant's argument that the trial court erred in not admitting the victim's Facebook video discussing the shooting is without merit because defense counsel did not seek to admit the video. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to instruct the jury on aggravated assault as an inferior-degree offense of felonious assault, because there was no evidence of serious provocation. Appellant's conviction for attempted murder was not against the manifest weight of the evidence. Judgment affirmed.