State v. Burnett
2016 Ohio 7502
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Chris Burnett was indicted for murder (with firearm specification), two counts of felonious assault (with firearm specifications), and tampering with evidence arising from a shooting that killed Cleave Johnson and injured Albert Magee. Three co-defendants were also indicted.
- At trial the jury acquitted Burnett of murder but convicted him of both felonious-assault counts (with firearm specifications) and tampering with evidence; the trial court sentenced him to an aggregate 22-year prison term.
- Key factual points: witnesses reported two shooters at the scene; victim Albert Magee identified Burnett as one shooter; two firearms were recovered near the scene; Burnett’s DNA was found on one recovered firearm and a magazine.
- Defense challenged (1) a supplemental jury instruction defining “possessed” (arguing it improperly included constructive possession) and (2) that the convictions were against the sufficiency and manifest weight of the evidence (arguing inconsistent verdicts and witness credibility issues due to co-defendant plea deals).
- The trial court gave the constructive-possession-capable instruction over defense objection; the jury was aware of co-defendants’ plea deals and heard victim identification and forensic evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jury instruction defining “possessed” (firearm specification) | Instruction was proper; no specific counter-argument beyond upholding discretion | Instruction improperly expanded to include constructive possession beyond the facts | Court: Although constructive-possession instruction was unnecessary, any error was harmless given victim ID and DNA evidence; no abuse of discretion overturned. |
| Sufficiency and manifest weight of evidence (including inconsistent verdicts & witness credibility) | Evidence (victim ID, recovered guns, DNA) supported convictions; inconsistent murder acquittal does not require reversal | Convictions inconsistent with acquittal on murder; main testimony came from co-defendants who received deals and lacked credibility | Court: Convictions supported under Jenks standard; inconsistent verdicts permissible; jury could rationally convict on assaults and tampering; affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (Ohio 1983) (standard for abuse of discretion)
- State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (Ohio 1991) (sufficiency-of-evidence standard following Jackson v. Virginia)
- State v. Martin, 20 Ohio App.3d 172 (Ohio Ct. App. 1983) (manifest-weight standard and new-trial guidance)
- State v. Gardner, 118 Ohio St.3d 420 (Ohio 2008) (inconsistent verdicts do not require reversal; separate-count analysis)
- United States v. Powell, 469 U.S. 57 (U.S. 1984) (inconsistent jury verdicts may reflect jury compromise or mistake and are not automatically invalid)