State v. Lennon

Citations

• 2017 Ohio 2753

Syllabus

Motion to suppress pretrial identifications R.C. 2933.83 photo lineup blind administrator single photograph jury instruction Crim.R. 29 sufficiency of the evidence manifest weight of the evidence consecutive sentences R.C. 2929.14 admissibility of evidence Evid.R. 401, 402 and 403. The trial court did not err when it permitted the pretrial identification testimony of an eyewitness and a victim. Since the eyewitness knew the alleged shooter, the detective showed her a single photograph. Therefore, R.C. 2933.83 did not apply and, considering the totality of the circumstances, the procedure for the eyewitness identification was not so impermissibly suggestive. With respect to the victim's pretrial identification, the detective complied with R.C. 2933.83 because he documented that he did not use a blind administrator. Moreover, the procedure for the victim's identification was not so impermissibly suggestive. The trial court was not required to give a jury instruction pursuant to R.C. 2933.83(C)(3). The jury verdict was not against the manifest weight of the evidence or sufficiency of the evidence. The trial court properly imposed consecutive sentences in accordance with R.C. 2929.14. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in allowing a redacted letter written by the defendant to be presented to the jury.