State v. Williams

Citations

• 2019 Ohio 2734

Syllabus

Sufficiency of the evidence, Crim.R. 29, manifest weight of the evidence, R.C. 2903.01, aggravated murder, R.C. 2923.162(A)(3), discharge of firearm on or near prohibited premises, R.C. 2941.141 and R.C. 2941.145, firearm specifications, R.C. 2923.03, complicity, aid or abet, mens rea, Evid.R. 701, Evid.R. 704, officer testimony, Evid.R. 404, other acts, jury instruction, accessory after the fact, R.C. 2929.14(B)(1)(g), allied offenses, consecutive sentence, R.C. 2941.25, merger. Appellant's convictions on the basis of complicity are supported by sufficient evidence and are not against the manifest weight. The jury heard the testimony of the witnesses and viewed the security camera videotapes of the area before, during, and after the shooting in this case. The video evidence depicts appellant's role as the driver of the automobile that transported the others involved with the shooting, including the shooter, to and from the scene. The jury could reasonably have determined that the stalking and execution-style killing once the victim had been incapacitated was sufficient to demonstrate the mens rea of prior calculation and design to constitute aggravated murder. Opinion testimony by the detective that appellant was not totally forthcoming during his interview did not rise to the level of plain error where there was no objection during trial and the jury viewed the videotaped interviews. Appellant cannot demonstrate that, but for the testimony, the outcome of the trial would have been different. The consecutive three-year sentences for the firearm specifications for the aggravated murder and discharge of firearm counts are mandatory pursuant to R.C. 2929.14(B)(1)(g). The aggravated murder and discharge of firearm counts did not merge because the decedent was the victim of the aggravated murder while the public was the victim of the illegal discharge of a firearm.