State v. Brown, 2019 Ohio 313

Victim (K.W.) was awakened in her Cleveland home in the early morning by two masked intruders who each had handguns; they forced her downstairs, ransacked the home, and committed forcible oral and vaginal rape.
Appellant Corey Brown was indicted on multiple counts including rape, kidnapping, aggravated burglary, aggravated robbery, tampering with evidence, and related three-year and one-year firearm specifications; jury found him guilty and he received an aggregate 20-year sentence.
After the state rested, defense counsel told the court Brown did not wish to testify; the court directly asked Brown and Brown confirmed he did not wish to testify.
Brown appealed, raising two issues: (1) the trial court allegedly failed to ensure he knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived his right to testify; and (2) the firearm specification convictions were against the manifest weight of the evidence because no firearm was recovered.
The court reviewed the record, including the colloquy in which Brown confirmed he had discussed testifying with counsel and waived the right, and victim testimony identifying the assailants as armed and describing guns being pointed at her.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether trial court erred by not ensuring defendant knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived right to testify	State: No error — court is not required to conduct a formal Crim.R. 11–style colloquy about testifying, and the record shows waiver	Brown: Trial court failed to confirm his understanding of the right to testify; his low IQ made an inquiry necessary	Court: No error; Bey establishes no required inquiry; here judge directly asked Brown who confirmed waiver, so waiver was valid
Whether firearm specifications were against the manifest weight of the evidence	State: Victim’s eyewitness testimony that two men brandished handguns supported firearm specifications; circumstantial evidence can prove operability	Brown: No firearm was recovered; only circumstantial evidence existed, so specifications are unsupported	Court: Affirmed; circumstantial and eyewitness testimony (guns pointed at victim, commands at gunpoint) sufficiently proved possession, display/brandishing, and operability

McCoy v. Louisiana, 138 S. Ct. 1500 (U.S. 2018) (defendant has right to insist counsel not concede guilt; choice of defense objective is defendant’s)
State v. Bey, 85 Ohio St.3d 487 (Ohio 1999) (trial court not required to conduct formal inquiry before defendant waives right to testify)
State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (Ohio 1997) (manifest-weight standard: reversal only in exceptional cases where jury clearly lost its way)
State v. Murphy, 49 Ohio St.3d 206 (Ohio 1990) (firearm enhancement can be proven by lay witness testimony)
State v. DeHass, 10 Ohio St.2d 230 (Ohio 1967) (credibility and weight of witness testimony are for the trier of fact)
State v. Wilson, 113 Ohio St.3d 382 (Ohio 2007) (trier of fact best positioned to evaluate witness demeanor and credibility)