State v. Davis
2016 Ohio 7964
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Defendant Ezra L. Davis was arrested in an apartment after Cleveland Metropolitan Housing Authority officers responded to allegations against him; Sergeant Neal detained Davis coming out of a bedroom and Davis told officers “the gun’s in the bedroom.”
- Officers found a loaded Rohm .22 revolver in plain view on the bedroom floor; forensic testing confirmed the gun was operable.
- The grand jury originally indicted Davis on eight counts (including rape, kidnapping, felonious assault, and having weapons while under disability); the state dismissed Counts 1–7 without prejudice when the alleged victim could not be located, and proceeded to trial on Count 8 (having weapons while under disability, R.C. 2923.13(A)(2)).
- A jury convicted Davis of having weapons while under disability; the court sentenced him to the maximum three-year prison term for a third-degree felony and ordered it served consecutively to an unrelated 435-day sentence for postrelease-control violation.
- On appeal Davis challenged sufficiency and manifest weight of the evidence (arguing no proof he possessed the gun), denial of his Crim.R. 29 motion, and that his maximum sentence was not commensurate with the offense.
- The Eighth District affirmed: it found sufficient circumstantial evidence of constructive possession and that the sentence was within statutory bounds and supported by consideration of relevant sentencing factors.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence to convict under R.C. 2923.13(A)(2) | State: circumstantial evidence (Davis emerged from bedroom, told officers the gun was there, had access; ammunition and Davis’s pills/phones found in vehicle linked to him) supported that Davis knowingly had/controlled the firearm | Davis: gun was found in an apartment with multiple people; no direct proof he acquired, used, carried, or possessed the gun; ownership not shown | Held: Affirmed. Viewing evidence in state’s favor, a rational trier of fact could find constructive possession and knowledge beyond a reasonable doubt |
| Crim.R. 29 denial (judgment of acquittal) | State: presented sufficient evidence to proceed to verdict | Davis: same sufficiency argument—trial court should have granted acquittal at end of state’s case | Held: Affirmed. Crim.R. 29 and sufficiency review identical; evidence sufficient to deny acquittal |
| Manifest weight of the evidence | State: credibility determinations favor its witnesses; jury entitled to believe state’s version | Davis: jury should not have credited lone officer testimony over alternative explanations; evidence weighs against conviction | Held: Affirmed. Appellate court will not overturn jury credibility determinations; not an exceptional case requiring reversal |
| Sentence proportionality / commensurateness | State: sentence within statutory range and court considered R.C. 2929.11/2929.12 factors, including criminal history and risk of recidivism | Davis: maximum sentence punitive, court failed to adequately consider mitigation and alternatives (treatment, CBCF) | Held: Affirmed. Maximum 36 months is within statutory range; trial court considered required sentencing factors and record supports sentence |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (1997) (standard for sufficiency and manifest-weight review and description of "weight" challenge)
- State v. Tenace, 109 Ohio St.3d 255 (2006) (Crim.R. 29 and sufficiency review equivalence)
- State v. Teamer, 82 Ohio St.3d 490 (1998) (possession to be determined from all attendant facts and circumstances)
- State v. Scalf, 126 Ohio App.3d 614 (1998) (constructive possession may be inferred from dominion or control over premises and knowledge of object)
- State v. Hardy, 60 Ohio App.2d 325 (1978) (definition of actual and constructive possession)