2012 Ohio 2041
Ohio Ct. App.2012Background
- Alexander was convicted by a jury in Scioto County Common Pleas Court of theft from an elderly person and breaking and entering.
- Carey, age 79, testified items including a lawn trimmer, drill, and vice grips were missing from his garage.
- Carey previously employed Alexander; the door to the garage was often left unlocked but Carey monitored access.
- Carey claimed Alexander admitted taking items and promised to repay; the lawn trimmer later appeared on Carey’s property.
- At sentencing, the court ordered $250 restitution without a hearing to determine its amount, prompting an appeal on restitution and weight of the evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Restitution amount determination | Alexander argues $250 restitution lacks evidentiary support. | Alexander contends there was no competent evidence establishing the loss amount. | Restitution must be tied to proven loss; remanded to determine proper amount |
| Weight of the evidence | Alexander asserts the verdict is against the manifest weight due to credibility issues. | Alexander argues Carey lied about photographic evidence and continued to employ Alexander, undermining credibility. | Convictions are not against the manifest weight; weight questions for jury; affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Brown, 4th Dist. No. 09CA3, 2009-Ohio-5390 (Ohio App. 4th Dist. 2009) (standard for weight of the evidence; credibility assessed by jury)
- Thompkins v. State, 78 Ohio St.3d 380, 678 N.E.2d 541 (1997) (weight-of-the-evidence review requires unanimous appellate panel)
- State v. Eskridge, 38 Ohio St.3d 56, 526 N.E.2d 304 (1988) (standard for sustaining convictions when evidence supports elements)
- State v. Johnson, 4th Dist. No. 03CA11, 2004-Ohio-2236 (Ohio App. 4th Dist. 2004) (plain-error review and restitution-related waivers)