In re C.R.
2017 Ohio 2596
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Consolidated juvenile appeals from Lake County Juvenile Court: appellant C.R. adjudicated delinquent for kidnapping and assault in one case, and burglary in a second case. Both judgments affirmed.
- Kidnapping/assault facts: victim T.T. (a friend) was cornered in appellant's bedroom, punched, stomped, struck with a curtain rod, and forced to remove and replace clothing; two videos showed appellant wielding a rod and physically restraining and assaulting T.T.
- Court found one kidnapping count (R.C. 2905.01(B)(2)) and two assault counts true; appellant did not contest the assault findings on appeal.
- Burglary facts: homeowners discovered items (TV, Xbox) missing; appellant was seen knocking on the front door ~45 minutes before the theft, a neighbor saw two juveniles (one at front door, one in back), appellant’s acquaintance N.G. said appellant admitted being present though denied entering, and family members provided identifications and statements.
- Appellant’s appellate claims: insufficiency of evidence (Crim.R. 29) and that verdicts were against the manifest weight of the evidence for kidnapping and for burglary.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (C.R.) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency — Kidnapping (R.C. 2905.01(B)(2)) | Video and testimony show appellant restrained T.T. and used force/threats creating substantial risk of serious physical harm | Fight was mutual; no restraint of liberty and no substantial risk of serious harm | Affirmed — evidence sufficient to prove restraint under circumstances creating substantial risk of serious physical harm |
| Manifest weight — Kidnapping | Video corroborates victim; trier of fact properly credited victim and video | Video susceptible to other interpretations; conviction against manifest weight | Affirmed — credibility and weight appropriately resolved by trial court |
| Sufficiency — Burglary (R.C. 2911.12(A)(1)) | Eyewitnesses placed appellant at the house shortly before and during the incident; appellant admitted presence to N.G. | Misidentification; presence earlier at the door ≠ proof of entry and theft | Affirmed — reasonable inferences permit finding of commission beyond reasonable doubt |
| Manifest weight — Burglary | Multiple witnesses and circumstantial evidence support the court’s credibility determinations | Inconsistent witness descriptions, timing, and TV size undermine reliability | Affirmed — inconsistencies were for the trier of fact to resolve; not an exceptional case warranting reversal |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (1997) (distinguishes sufficiency and manifest-weight review and explains appellate role)
- State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (1991) (legal-sufficiency standard: evidence viewed in light most favorable to prosecution)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) (constitutional sufficiency standard)
- State v. Diar, 120 Ohio St.3d 460 (2008) (discusses sufficiency review and reliance on Jenks)
- Tibbs v. Florida, 457 U.S. 31 (1982) (appellate court acting as a "thirteenth juror" in weight review)
- State v. Martin, 20 Ohio App.3d 172 (1983) (articulates manifest-weight reversal standard)