2019 Ohio 5004
Ohio Ct. App.2019Background
- On Dec. 16, 2016 Toledo police responded to 247 Mayberry after a 911 call in which C.C. pleaded that her husband was chasing her with a gun; officers later found C.C. dead of multiple gunshot wounds and appellant Terry Campbell barricaded upstairs with the couple’s infant.
- Campbell was indicted for aggravated murder (two theories), murder, and aggravated burglary; he withdrew and later rescinded an initial guilty plea and proceeded to jury trial.
- Police executed a search of the home; officers recovered Campbell’s wallet containing a handwritten note critical of C.C., two firearms, casings, and electronic evidence (cell phone videos/messages including a text “Hey i killed [C.C.] im sorry”). Ballistics and DNA tied the firearms to the scene.
- At the scene a S.W.A.T. throw-phone/robots were used to communicate/observe; Sergeant Shaner spoke with Campbell during the standoff and relayed that Campbell admitted “I did. I did, Bill.” Campbell later surrendered.
- Trial evidence included the 911 recording, security-camera video of Campbell entering the house, forensic and coroner testimony (eight gunshot wounds; death within minutes), the wallet note and text messages, and BCI ballistics/DNA. Jury convicted on all counts; court merged counts and sentenced Campbell to life without parole plus mandatory 3 years for the firearm spec.
Issues
| Issue | State's Argument | Campbell's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Warrant particularity: admissibility of wallet note seized under warrant | Warrant listed specific items tied to the death plus a catchall "any/all other unnamed evidence related to the death of [C.C.]" which was limited by the listed items and the crime under investigation | The catchall phrase was overly broad and failed Fourth Amendment particularity | Warrant was sufficiently particular because the generic phrase was expressly tied to identified items/crimes; search was not a general exploratory search — suppression denied |
| Miranda/custodial interrogation: admissibility of statements to Sgt. Shaner during standoff | Statements were volunteered during negotiations to secure a peaceful surrender, not product of custodial interrogation; officers were not in the physical presence or in immediate control | Campbell was effectively in custody (barricaded, surrounded by SWAT) and Miranda warnings were required before questioning | Not "custody" for Miranda purposes in a standoff; Shaner’s remarks were not interrogation but negotiation/minimization; statements admissible |
| Sufficiency/manifest weight & Crim.R.29: aggravated murder (prior calculation & design) and aggravated burglary/trespass theories | Evidence (texts wishing death, wallet note, chase, multiple shots from two guns, ballistics, Campbell’s admission) supported prior calculation and design and that Campbell trespassed/committed aggravated burglary when he killed C.C. | Campbell argued absence of premeditation (calm entry, dressed in underwear, presence of child, quickness of events) and that he had privilege to be in the home | Viewing evidence in prosecution’s favor, a rational juror could find prior calculation and design and aggravated burglary beyond reasonable doubt; verdict not against manifest weight; Crim.R.29 denial upheld |
| Ineffective assistance / cumulative error / sentencing review | Defense counsel investigated suppression issues, plea offers, and warned Campbell about risky defenses; no specific prejudicial omissions shown; sentencing followed statutory factors | Campbell alleged counsel failed to negotiate plea, failed to suppress evidence, failed to object to many exhibits, and was not warned pretrial about using statements at sentencing; also claimed cumulative error and that life-without-parole was excessive | Strickland test not satisfied — no deficient performance or prejudice shown; no cumulative error found. Sentence for aggravated murder is statutorily not reviewable on appeal; even if reviewed, court did not abuse discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Burnside, 100 Ohio St.3d 152 (standard of review for suppression findings)
- State v. Castagnola, 145 Ohio St.3d 1 (warrant particularity requires item-specific limits to avoid exploratory searches)
- Maryland v. Garrison, 480 U.S. 79 (Fourth Amendment particularity purpose)
- Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (custodial interrogation and warnings rule)
- Stansbury v. California, 511 U.S. 318 (custody inquiry: freedom of movement standard)
- Rhode Island v. Innis, 446 U.S. 291 (definition of interrogation and "functional equivalent")
- State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (standard for sufficiency of the evidence review)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (ineffective assistance two-prong test)