State v. Blanton, 2021 Ohio 65

Blanton was indicted on four counts (aggravated murder, murder, felonious assault, aggravated robbery) arising from separate incidents; all counts carried firearm specifications. Count 4 (aggravated robbery) related to an August 6, 2018 gas-station incident.
At trial the jury acquitted Blanton of Counts 1–3 but convicted him of Count 4 and the firearm specifications; the court sentenced him to six years on the underlying offense plus three years on the firearm specs (aggregate nine years).
Surveillance video showed Blanton arrive with two codefendants, brandish a handgun at the victim (Yuri West), tackle/search him, remove West’s gun and hand it to a codefendant, and leave; West’s cell phone was also taken by a codefendant.
On cross-examination Blanton admitted surprising the victim, brandishing a firearm, and forcefully taking the victim’s gun with help from his codefendants; his defense was that he disarmed the victim for protection based on prior threats.
On appeal Blanton raised two issues: (1) the trial court erred by failing to define the statutory term “theft” in the aggravated-robbery instruction (claimed plain error), and (2) the trial court abused its discretion by refusing to remove Juror No. 6 for cause after she expressed fear of workplace “retaliation.”

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Trial court failed to define “theft” in aggravated-robbery instruction	State: omission harmless; “theft” is a common-usage term and jury had sufficient evidence to find the element beyond a reasonable doubt	Blanton: omission was plain error affecting substantial rights and denied due process; requires new trial	Court: Although the court should have defined theft, the error was not plain — no manifest miscarriage of justice given unambiguous video and Blanton’s admissions; affirm conviction
Refusal to remove juror for cause after she expressed fear of workplace retaliation	State: juror repeatedly said she could be fair; judge entitled to assess credibility and demeanor; discretion to retain juror	Blanton: juror was biased or susceptible to intimidation and was effectively “talked into staying,” so she should have been excused	Court: No abuse of discretion; juror consistently assured impartiality, demeanor credible, verdict (guilty on only robbery count) supports impartial decision-making

State v. Rogers, 38 N.E.3d 860 (Ohio 2015) (plain-error standard; burden on appellant)
State v. Long, 372 N.E.2d 804 (Ohio 1977) (plain-error/manifest miscarriage of justice standard)
State v. Wamsley, 884 N.E.2d 45 (Ohio 2008) (failure to instruct on each element reviewed in context of whole charge and record)
State v. Adams, 404 N.E.2d 144 (Ohio 1980) (general rule that jury must be instructed on all elements; review for manifest miscarriage)
State v. Gross, 776 N.E.2d 1061 (Ohio 2002) (terms of common usage need not be defined)
State v. Woods, 47 N.E.3d 894 (Ohio App.) (failure to define mens rea can be plain error where evidence of purpose is ambiguous)
Skilling v. United States, 561 U.S. 358 (U.S. 2010) (trial court’s assessment of juror credibility and demeanor central to impartiality determinations)