State v. Boyde
2017 Ohio 7839
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- On March 10, 2016, Duane D. Boyde was indicted for felonious assault with a firearm specification and having weapons while under disability (WUD). He waived a jury for the WUD count; the felonious assault count was tried to a jury.
- Victim Dominique McQueary testified he was shot in the hip on February 28, 2016, identified Boyde (known as "Wayne Boyde") to police at the hospital, and picked him from a photo array days later.
- A single 9mm shell casing was recovered at the scene; police introduced Boyde’s prior 2003 robbery conviction as the foundation for the WUD charge without objection.
- Boyde denied involvement and gave an alibi; an alibi witness testified he was elsewhere. Two lay witnesses admitted drinking and did not (or could not) identify Boyde at the scene.
- The jury acquitted Boyde of felonious assault; the trial judge (finding the victim credible) convicted Boyde of WUD and sentenced him to 30 months, concurrent to another sentence. Boyde appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of the evidence for WUD | McQueary’s eyewitness ID and police testimony suffice to prove Boyde knowingly had/used a firearm while under disability | Victim’s testimony had inconsistencies; other witnesses did not see Boyde; credible alibi undermines proof beyond a reasonable doubt | Court affirmed: viewed in prosecution’s favor, McQueary’s testimony was sufficient to support WUD conviction |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel for trying WUD to the court | N/A (State opposed claim) | Counsel was ineffective for recommending a bench trial on WUD; had the jury decided WUD it would have followed acquittal on assault | Court rejected claim: defense strategy to try WUD to the judge was reasonable to avoid exposing prior conviction to a jury; no deficient performance shown |
Key Cases Cited
- Thompkins v. Ohio, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (legal sufficiency standard explained)
- Robinson v. State, 124 Ohio St.3d 76 (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
- Jenks v. Ohio, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (evidentiary standard for criminal sufficiency)
- Treesh v. Ohio, 90 Ohio St.3d 460 (verdict disturbance standard)
- Yarbrough v. Ohio, 95 Ohio St.3d 227 (credibility not reassessed on sufficiency review)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (two-prong ineffective-assistance test)
- Maxwell v. Ohio, 139 Ohio St.3d 12 (debatable trial tactics do not usually establish ineffective assistance)
- Elmore v. Ohio, 111 Ohio St.3d 515 (deference to reasonable trial strategy)