State v. Scott

Citations

• 2019 Ohio 5014

Syllabus

The trial court did not err in overruling the appellant's motion for a separate trial. The appellant and a co-defendant did not present antagonistic defenses requiring separate trials. The trial court adequately instructed the jury regarding aiding and abetting despite its failure to use the precise language found in the pattern Ohio Jury Instructions. The appellant's conviction for felonious assault was not against the manifest weight of the evidence. The trial court's judgment entry is inaccurate, or at least inartfully drafted, insofar as it suggests that the appellant was tried by a jury on felonious assault charges and repeat-violent-offender specifications the specifications were tried to the bench. Although the trial court correctly imposed sentence on the appellant as a repeat violent offender, the judgment entry itself also fails to explicitly state whether the specifications were found to be proven. Judgment affirmed but case remanded for a corrective nunc pro tunc judgment entry.