State v. Coleman-Muse, 2016 Ohio 5636

Background

On March 28, 2011, Diquan Coleman-Muse (appellant) and Andre Jordan rode in a car driven by A.R.; A.R.'s two small children were also in the backseat.
The group stopped near Damiko Russell after being directed to him; Andre displayed a silver revolver and uttered threats; Coleman-Muse reached across the children and fired shots; Russell died from multiple gunshot wounds.
Coleman-Muse was indicted for aggravated murder (with prior calculation and design) with a drive-by specification and for murder with a drive-by specification; jury trial in April 2015 resulted in guilty verdicts on both counts.
Coleman-Muse requested a jury instruction on the lesser-included offense of felonious assault; the trial court denied the request. He was sentenced to 28 years’ imprisonment.
On appeal Coleman-Muse raised three errors: (1) failure to instruct on felonious assault; (2) verdict against the manifest weight of the evidence; and (3) insufficient evidence to support the convictions.
The court reviewed (a) whether a felonious-assault instruction was warranted under the two-tier Deanda test and (b) sufficiency and manifest-weight standards under Ohio law, and affirmed the convictions.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court erred by refusing to instruct the jury on the lesser-included offense of felonious assault	State: The evidence showed the shooting supported aggravated murder; felonious-assault instruction not warranted because facts did not permit reasonable acquittal of the greater offense and conviction of the lesser	Coleman-Muse: Jury could have believed he did not commit murder but only attempted/caused non-fatal harm (felonious assault), given evidence that two shooters were present and uncertainty which shots were fatal	Court: No abuse of discretion; under the second-tier (evidence) inquiry, the record did not support giving the felonious-assault instruction
Whether the convictions were supported by sufficient evidence	State: Eyewitness testimony (A.R.) identified Coleman-Muse firing the fatal shots; forensic evidence tied the semi-automatic to casings at the scene; autopsy showed fatal wound consistent with that weapon	Coleman-Muse: A.R. was inconsistent/initially lied to police and testified pursuant to a plea deal; Andre pled to voluntary manslaughter; no physical evidence directly tying appellant to scene beyond a gun recovered later from a car	Court: Viewing evidence in prosecution’s favor, a rational juror could find elements beyond reasonable doubt; forensic and eyewitness evidence sufficient
Whether the verdicts were against the manifest weight of the evidence	State: Credibility issues were for the jury; physical and forensic evidence corroborated testimony	Coleman-Muse: Jury lost its way given witness credibility problems and alternative shooter theory	Court: No; jurors were entitled to weigh credibility (including plea deal and prior lies); this is not the exceptional case to overturn verdicts on weight grounds

Key Cases Cited

Wolons v. State, 44 Ohio St.3d 64 (Ohio 1989) (abuse-of-discretion standard for jury-instruction decisions)
Adams v. State, 62 Ohio St.2d 151 (Ohio 1980) (definition of abuse of discretion)
Deanda v. State, 136 Ohio St.3d 18 (Ohio 2013) (two-tier test for lesser-included-offense instructions)
Evans v. State, 122 Ohio St.3d 381 (Ohio 2009) (clarification of lesser-included analysis)
Kidder v. State, 32 Ohio St.3d 279 (Ohio 1987) (statutory-elements step discussion)
Deem v. State, 40 Ohio St.3d 205 (Ohio 1988) (three-part test for lesser-included offenses)
Jenks v. State, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (Ohio 1991) (standard for sufficiency review)
Thompkins v. State, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (Ohio 1997) (difference between sufficiency and manifest weight review)
Wilson v. State, 113 Ohio St.3d 382 (Ohio 2007) (weight-of-evidence principles)
Martin v. State, 20 Ohio App.3d 172 (Ohio Ct. App. 1983) (manifest-weight review guidance)