State v. Curtis, 2016 Ohio 1318

On March 7, 2014, Frank Curtis (known locally as "Three") shot and killed Daryl Chatman during an attempted robbery at an auto‑repair site; Curtis took cash from the victim and fled.
Two eyewitnesses (Markisha Chatman and Edonia Anderson) identified Curtis as the shooter; other potential witnesses were unavailable or recanted.
Cell‑phone location and call records placed Curtis’s phone in the area and showed calls between Curtis and co‑participant Brandon Kaiser before and after the shooting.
A Hamilton County jury convicted Curtis of murder with a specification, aggravated robbery, carrying a concealed weapon, and having a weapon while under a disability; acquitted on one aggravated‑murder count and one aggravated‑robbery specification.
Trial court sentenced Curtis to consecutive terms totalling 31½ years to life. Curtis appealed raising five assignments of error (sufficiency/weight, prosecutorial misconduct, spectator ejection, mistrial for deadlocked jury, and merger/sentencing).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency / manifest weight of evidence	Evidence (eyewitness IDs, phone records) supports convictions	Witness inconsistencies and unavailable witnesses made verdict unreliable	Convictions supported; sufficiency and weight challenges overruled
Prosecutorial misconduct	Prosecutor’s statements and witness examination were proper	Prosecutor relied on false testimony, misstated evidence, denigrated defense, and stacked inferences	No reversible misconduct; comments and closing argument within permissible bounds
Ejection of sleeping spectators	Court acted within authority to maintain order	Ejection prejudiced defendant by removing supporters in front of jury	No abuse of discretion; defendant not prejudiced
Mistrial / Howard instruction for deadlock	Continued deliberations with Howard/Martens instructions were proper	Instruction coerced a verdict from a deadlocked jury and warranted mistrial	No abuse of discretion; instructions were appropriate and jury later reached verdicts
Merger of murder and aggravated robbery	Murder and aggravated robbery arise from same conduct and harm and must merge	Offenses have distinct import; cumulative sentences permissible	Murder and aggravated‑robbery convictions must merge; sentences vacated for those counts; remand for election by the state

State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (insufficiency vs. manifest‑weight standards)
United States v. Young, 470 U.S. 1 (prosecutorial‑comment standards in closing argument)
State v. Howard, 42 Ohio St.3d 18 (supplemental jury instruction to encourage verdict)
State v. Ruff, 143 Ohio St.3d 114 (allied‑offenses merger framework)
State v. Iacona, 93 Ohio St.3d 173 (trial court’s discretion to grant mistrial)
State v. Herring, 94 Ohio St.3d 246 (mistrial required only when fair trial impossible)
State v. Diar, 120 Ohio St.3d 460 (scope of permissible inferences in closing argument)