State v. Campbell
2019 Ohio 583
Ohio Ct. App.2019Background
- Troopers stopped a dark green Saturn after observing a marked-lanes violation; Trooper Grimm activated lights and began the stop.
- As the vehicle pulled over, Trooper Grimm saw an object thrown from the passenger side; officers later detained passenger Curtis Campbell.
- Officers observed signs suggesting drug use (white residue on Campbell, a pen tube with residue under his feet); a syringe and two baggies containing white powder/rock were recovered; field tests indicated cocaine.
- Campbell was indicted for possession of cocaine (R.C. 2925.11) and tampering with evidence (R.C. 2921.12(A)(1)); a jury convicted on both counts.
- On appeal Campbell challenged sufficiency and manifest weight of evidence for tampering with evidence; the Ninth District affirmed the tampering conviction but noted clerical sentencing/judgment entry errors and remanded for correction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for tampering (R.C. 2921.12(A)(1)) | State: evidence showed Campbell knowingly discarded drugs after a stop began and intended to impair evidence availability | Campbell: no evidence he knew an investigation into his drug activity was likely when he discarded the drugs; stop was for a traffic violation only | Affirmed: sufficient evidence that Campbell knew an investigation into his drug activity was likely and discarded the drugs to impair evidence availability |
| Manifest weight of evidence for tampering | State: testimony, residue, paraphernalia, video, and retrieval of baggies support conviction | Campbell: verdict against weight of evidence; insufficient record showing he was likely to be investigated for drugs | Affirmed: appellant failed to develop a manifest-weight argument; conviction not against manifest weight |
| Proper measure of "likely to be instituted" investigation | State: defendant's knowledge at time of act controls; need not be the same investigation that justified the stop | Campbell: argues State must show investigation into his drug activity was already underway or was a reason for the stop | Court: measures likelihood at time of the act and requires defendant knew an investigation relating to the discarded evidence was likely; facts here suffice |
| Clerical errors in judgment entries | State: N/A (court observed inconsistencies) | Campbell: N/A | Court: affirmed convictions but remanded to correct typographical/judgment entry errors and prepare nunc pro tunc entry |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Straley, 139 Ohio St.3d 339 (2014) (tampering requires that the evidence relate to the specific ongoing or likely investigation the defendant knew of)
- State v. Barry, 145 Ohio St.3d 354 (2015) (knowledge of committing a crime does not alone impute knowledge of an impending investigation)
- State v. Martin, 151 Ohio St.3d 470 (2017) (statutory scope and interpretation of R.C. 2921.12 analyzed)
- State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (1997) (standard for reviewing sufficiency and weight of the evidence)
- State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (1991) (standard for sufficiency review: whether any rational trier of fact could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt)
- State v. Otten, 33 Ohio App.3d 339 (9th Dist. 1986) (standard for manifest-weight review)