State v. Brewer
2016 Ohio 5366
Ohio Ct. App.2016Background
- Paul Brewer was indicted for failing to register a change of address under R.C. 2950.05(F)(1) after authorities discovered he was in Boston though he had registered a Lorain, Ohio address in 2012.
- Brewer initially pled not guilty, later asserted incompetency and pled not guilty by reason of insanity, then withdrew that plea and reinstated a not-guilty plea.
- Brewer signed a written, judge-signed waiver of statutory speedy-trial time on September 9, 2013, then withdrew that waiver on December 6, 2013 and requested trial.
- The trial was set for February 2014 but was continued to March 10, 2014 because a capital-murder trial occupied the court’s February docket.
- At trial the State presented testimony from Brewer’s parole officer and landlord showing Brewer was absent from his registered address for weeks, and that Brewer never notified the sheriff that the registered address was no longer accurate.
- Brewer was convicted; on appeal he challenged (1) denial of his speedy-trial dismissal motion, (2) denial of his Crim.R. 29 motion (insufficiency), and (3) admission of testimony about his post-release control as unfairly prejudicial.
Issues
| Issue | Brewer’s Argument | State’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Brewer’s written speedy-trial waiver was enforceable and tolled statutory time | Waiver was an unenforceable adhesion form; only NGRI filing tolled time | Waiver was a valid, judge-signed written unlimited waiver; after withdrawal the State had to try Brewer within a reasonable time | Waiver valid; withdrawal followed by reasonable scheduling; denial of dismissal affirmed |
| Whether triple-count (R.C. 2945.71(E)) time deprived Brewer of a speedy trial after waiver withdrawal | Triple-count should apply from arrest and State failed to try within statutory window | After withdrawal statutory strictures no longer applied; court set reasonable dates and a minimal delay occurred due to capital-murder trial | Trial occurred within a reasonable time after withdrawal; no speedy-trial violation |
| Whether evidence was sufficient to deny Crim.R. 29 motion (failure to register change of address) | State failed to prove Brewer changed address or that old address was inaccurate | Landlord, parole officer, and deputy testimony showed Brewer vacated and was absent for weeks and later found in Boston without notifying sheriff | Viewed in light most favorable to State, evidence sufficient to support conviction |
| Whether testimony about post-release control/escape conviction was unfairly prejudicial under Evid.R. 403/404(B) | Officer Rhines’ reference to post-release control/escape unfairly prejudiced jury | Testimony was limited to officer’s personal knowledge of Brewer’s whereabouts; court gave limiting instruction and struck irrelevant details | Trial court did not abuse discretion; limiting instruction minimized prejudice; testimony admissible as limited |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. O’Brien, 34 Ohio St.3d 7 (Ohio 1987) (written waiver of speedy-trial rights and requirements after withdrawal)
- State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (Ohio 1991) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of evidence)
- Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (Ohio 1983) (abuse-of-discretion standard)
- State v. Jones, 135 Ohio St.3d 10 (Ohio 2012) (limiting instruction and jury adherence presumption)
- State v. Brewer, 121 Ohio St.3d 202 (Ohio 2009) (appellate consideration of all evidence for sufficiency review, even if improperly admitted)
- Murphy v. Waterfront Comm’n, 65 Ohio St.3d 554 (Ohio 1992) (presumption that jury follows court instructions)
- Lockhart v. Nelson, 488 U.S. 33 (U.S. 1988) (consideration of all evidence on sufficiency review)