State v. Babock, 2012 Ohio 3627

Crockett disappeared May 11–12, 2011; Appellant claimed she was hospitalized after an incident.
Crockett, 25, had three children and dating Appellant for about seven months; they had been evicted from their apartment.
Crockett's car trunk contained her body; by May 14, police found Appellant inside Pamela Walker's home and he fled to a back room.
Appellant confessed to investigators in a recorded interview, describing a fatal sleeper hold and placing Crockett's body in the trunk; the autopsy cited cervical compression as the cause of death.
Stark County Grand Jury amended the indictment to include murder and gross abuse of a corpse; trial court denied motions to suppress the taped statement and to appoint an expert; jury convicted Appellant and sentenced him to 16 years to life.
The appellate court affirmed, concluding no abuse of discretion on expert funds, no required lesser-included-offense instructions, no prejudice from juror conduct, and sufficiency/weight of the evidence supported the conviction.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court erred by denying funds for an expert	Babcock argued for a particularized need for a forensic expert	Babcock contends due process requires funding for an expert when necessary	No abuse of discretion; no particularized need shown
Whether jury should have received lesser-included-offense instructions	State contends evidence did not support lesser offenses	Babcock argues involuntary manslaughter/reckless homicide should have been charged	No error; evidence supported murder beyond reasonable doubt and lesser offenses were not warranted
Whether jury-deliberation conduct prejudiced the defendant	State relies on juror communication concerns not prejudicial	Appellant asserts juror No. 10 affected verdict	No reversible prejudice; instruction and conduct did not prejudice outcome
Whether the conviction is supported by sufficient and weight-of-evidence standards	State argues evidence shows intent to kill	Appellant contends death resulted from unintended actions	Conviction sustained on both sufficiency and weight grounds

State v. Powell, 49 Ohio St.3d 255 (1990) (expert funding requires particularized need under Ake factors)
State v. Mason, 82 Ohio St.3d 144 (1998) (Ake factors guide determining need for an expert)
State v. Jenkins, 15 Ohio St.3d 164 (1993) (requires particularized need for expert assistance)
State v. Robb, 88 Ohio St.3d 59 (2000) (instruction on lesser offenses governed by sufficiency of evidence)
State v. Mitts, 81 Ohio St.3d 223 (1998) (discretion in jury instruction on lesser offenses)
State v. Morris, 2004-Ohio-6988 (2004) (trial court's jury instruction discretion analyzed for abuse)
Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (1997) (standard for sufficiency of evidence)
Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (1991) (framework for reviewing sufficiency and weight of evidence)
DeHass, 10 Ohio St.2d 230 (1967) (credibility and weight are jury determinations)
Phillips, 74 Ohio St.3d 72 (2000) (defines purpose as a mental state for crimes)
Ake v. Oklahoma, 470 U.S. 68 (1985) (due process requires expert when necessary to ensure a fair trial)
Wolons, 44 Ohio St.3d 64 (1989) (standard for jury instruction on reasonable doubt and defense)
Sims, 2005-Ohio-5846 (2005) (abuse of discretion in trial rulings)
Lessin, 1993-Ohio-487 (1993) (abuse of discretion standard in jury instruction)