State v. Crump, 941 N.E.2d 859

Appellant Brandon Crump was convicted in Franklin County Court of Common Pleas of burglary, a second-degree felony, and sentenced to eight years' imprisonment.
On October 27, 2009, 9-1-1 caller Katherine Spencer reported two black males breaking into a neighbor's apartment at 660 Woodrow Avenue, based on observations including a back window and back door entry.
During the 9-1-1 call, Spencer described one suspect in a red jacket and one in a black hoodie; at arrest Crump wore a red Ohio State jacket (no hood) matching the red-jacket description.
A box of ammunition was found on Crump's person, and Turner testified the ammunition belonged to him and that the back window had been pried open with items missing from the apartment.
Crump testified he found the ammunition near the patio after learning of the burglary and claimed others had committed the break-in; he was arrested as police arrived.
The trial court declined Crump’s request to instruct on theft as a lesser-included offense of burglary; Crump challenged the sufficiency and weight of the evidence on appeal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
admissibility of defense witness questioning	Crump contends the court abused discretion by limiting questioning of his brother about Spencer's marijuana use.	Crump relies on Impeachment rules; the testimony was collateral and properly limited.	No abuse of discretion; exclusion was reasonable.
theft as a lesser-included offense of burglary	Theft should be included as a lesser offense under Deem and Mosely framework.	Theft is not a lesser-included offense of burglary because burglary can occur without committing theft.	Theft is not a lesser-included offense of burglary.
sufficiency of the evidence	Sufficient evidence identified Crump as the perpetrator of the break-in.	Evidence inconsistencies undermine identification and guilt.	Evidence is sufficient to support the conviction.
manifest weight of the evidence	Weight of the evidence supports Crump's conviction given credibility determinations.	Discrepancies in jacket description and identification show the verdict deems against the weight of the evidence.	Conviction not against the manifest weight of the evidence.

State v. Deem, 40 Ohio St.3d 205 (Ohio 1988) (Deem test for lesser-included offenses)
Shaker Hts. v. Mosely, 2007-Ohio-2072 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2007) (three-part Deem inquiry for lesser offenses)
State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (Ohio 1991) (definition of sufficiency for criminal convictions)
Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. Supreme Court, 1980) (clear standard for sufficiency review)
State v. DeHass, 10 Ohio St.2d 230 (Ohio 1967) (credibility determination in weighing evidence)
State v. Harris, 19 O.O.3d 133 (Ohio App. 1979) (considers lesser-included offenses under Deem)
State v. Kilgore, 2000 WL 770530 (Ohio 2000) (Title refers to burglary and related offenses (note: WL citation))