Skip to main content

State v. Harris

Citations

  • 2025 Ohio 5438

Syllabus

AGGRAVATED MURDER — SELF-DEFENSE — PRIOR CALCULATION AND DESIGN — VOIR DIRE — PROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT — JURY INSTRUCTIONS — JUDICIAL BIAS — CUMULATIVE ERROR — MOTION TO DISMISS — CONSECUTIVE SENTENCES FINDINGS — JAIL-TIME CREDIT — FORFEITURE: The trial court did not err in rejecting defendant's self-defense claim where defendant was at fault because he chose to confront the victim, left the safety of his porch, and brought along a loaded firearm and where the record indicates defendant did not fear the victim but sought to protect the neighborhood from someone he perceived to be a car thief rather than fearing the unknown man. There was sufficient, credible evidence of prior calculation and design to support defendant's aggravated murder conviction where the record shows that defendant pointed his gun at the victim three times immediately upon arriving home and seeing the man down the street and defendant then went up to his house, deliberated, and chose to leave the threshold and confront the victim with a loaded firearm in hand. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in curtailing defense counsel's questions during voir dire about implicit racial bias after one juror mentioned having negative experiences at work with Black people where defense counsel did not attempt to inquire into that juror's experiences and instead moved on to another topic and, moreover, where the defense did not exhaust its peremptory challenges. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in declining to strike a prospective juror for cause because the juror strongly believed convicted felons should not be able to use guns for self-defense where, upon questioning by the trial court, the prospective juror indicated he could follow the law and be fair and impartial, and where the defense did not exhaust its peremptory challenges. The trial court did not err in ruling that the prosecutor did not engage in misconduct during closing arguments when she stated that defendant essentially ad

Judges: Kinsley

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

2 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

63 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.