State v. Lee

Citations

• 2017 Ohio 7377

Syllabus

VIDENCE-PROSECUTOR-COUNSEL-VERDICTS-WEIGHT/SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE-SENTENCING: At defendant's trial for aggravated robbery and robbery, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence that tended to show defendant's motive and access to a gun similar to the gun used in the robbery. Defendant's conviction was not subject to reversal on the ground of prosecutorial misconduct, when much of the conduct did not rise to the level of prosecutorial misconduct, and when the demonstrated misconduct was not outcome-determinative. Defendant was not denied the effective assistance of counsel, when the alleged deficiencies in trial counsel's performance were not outcome-determinative. Defendant's aggravated-robbery conviction was not contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence and was supported by sufficient evidence. The trial court did not err in overruling defendant's motion for acquittal on the ground of inconsistent verdicts, because the guilty verdict on the principal charge was not invalidated by an acquittal on a specification charging identical behavior. Defendant's aggravated-robbery sentence was not contrary to law, when the sentence was within the statutory range, and the court stated that it had considered the purposes of felony sentencing and the seriousness of the offense, as well as the fact that defendant had been on community control at the time of the offense, his criminal record, and his codefendant's sentence.