State v. Black, 2013 Ohio 2105

Background

George J. Black was convicted in Ross County Common Pleas Court of involuntary manslaughter, felonious assault, and failure to stop after a non-public-road accident; the offenses of involuntary manslaughter and felonious assault were merged for sentencing.
Trial led to a total sentence of 12 years, with nine years for involuntary manslaughter and three years for the non-public-road accident count, consecutive to each other.
The incident occurred in the early morning of January 13, 2011 at the Valley Bar in Bainbridge, Ohio, involving Black, Tim Keaton, Bob Nibert, and others, with disputed accounts of actions before and after a confrontation.
The State’s version allege that Black accelerated his truck, striking Nibert in the parking lot and causing fatal injuries; the defense claimed Black was fleeing an ongoing attack in a perilous parking lot, denying hitting Nibert.
The trial court later acknowledged merging for sentencing but its Judgment Entry of Sentence lacked the necessary findings under R.C. 2929.14(C), generating a conclusion that the sentence was clearly and convincingly contrary to law for the consecutive terms.
On appeal, the Fourth District affirmed the verdict but reversed the Judgment Entry of Sentence and remanded for proper sentencing proceedings.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether voir dire questioning was improper	Black asserts voir dire sought to pre-try the case by probing accident history to bias jurors.	Black contends the questions were irrelevant or prejudicial and violated fair-trial rights.	No reversible error; questions were permitted and did not produce a biased panel.
Prosecutorial misconduct during voir dire or trial	Black argues two improper actions biased the jury and violated due process.	Black asserts the questions and one witness query improperly bolstered the State's case.	No reversible prosecutorial misconduct; no prejudicial effect shown.
Effective assistance of counsel	Black claims counsel failed to object to voir dire questions and to press a blood-thinning medication defense.	Counsel’s strategic decisions and lack of evidence to prove prejudice meant no ineffective assistance.	No ineffective assistance established; strategic choices stance supported.
Failure to instruct on self-defense	Black contends the court should have given a self-defense instruction based on the evidence.	Court found insufficient evidence to warrant a self-defense instruction given the circumstances and instructions.	No error; trial court did not abuse discretion in denying self-defense instruction.
Consecutive sentencing and statutory compliance	Black argues the consecutive terms were imposed without proper statutory findings under R.C. 2929.14(C)(4).	Black asserts the court considered remorselessness and other factors but failed to state explicit findings in the judgment.	The sentence is clearly and convincingly contrary to law; remand for proper findings and resentencing.

Key Cases Cited

State v. Leonard, 2009-Ohio-6191 (4th Dist. No. 08CA24) (prosecutorial misconduct requires prejudice to fair trial)
State v. Murphy, 2010-Ohio-5031 (4th Dist. No. 09CA3311) (jury instructions presumed followed; admissibility cautions)
State v. Keeley, 2012-Ohio-3564 (4th Dist. No. 11CA5) (plain-error review for prosecutorial conduct; non-prejudice standard)
State v. Redecker, 2010-Ohio-505 (4th Dist. No. 08CA33) (instruction sufficiency depends on evidence support)
State v. Goff, 2013-Ohio-42 (4th Dist. No. 11CA20) (self-defense standards and jury instruction considerations)