State v. Howard

Citations

• 2025 Ohio 3281

Syllabus

Evidence; Crim.R. 16; discovery violation; felony murder; \proximate cause theory\; manifest weight; sufficiency; circumstantial evidence; stacking inferences; silence; lack of remorse; Fifth Amendment; sentencing; recidivism factors; consecutive sentences. Trial court did not abuse its discretion by admitting newly discovered evidence not produced in discovery in violation of Crim.R. 16 because there was no indication that the evidence prejudiced the defense. Direct and circumstantial evidence were sufficient to establish the defendant's criminal liability without impermissibly stacking inferences. Appellant's convictions were not against the manifest weight of the evidence. Although the trial court impermissibly considered the defendant's silence as a lack of remorse for sentencing purposes, the defendant's consecutive sentence was affirmed because other factors supported the consecutive sentence and the defendant failed to demonstrate a reasonable probability that but for the trial court's consideration of his silence, the sentence would have been different. Trial court's consecutive-sentence findings were supported by clear and convincing evidence in the record.