State v. Elmore, 60 N.E.3d 794

Anthony Elmore was indicted for felonious assault (R.C. 2903.11(A)(2)) with a firearm specification and weapons under disability; jury convicted on both counts.
Incident: Elmore and William Ross (co-defendant) left a porch, hid in woods, and an ambush shooting occurred; Torrance Lyda was shot; multiple witnesses placed Elmore and Ross together and heard shots from two guns.
Elmore gave a recorded statement admitting plan to "count to 5… and we gon' air 'em out," saying Ross slipped and fired, and that he fired three shots to "cover" Ross and left his gun in the woods.
Elmore testified, claiming he fired only warning/cover shots; on cross he admitted planning and conspiring with Ross to ambush and shoot the group.
Jury found Elmore guilty; trial court sentenced him to 8 years (felonious assault) + 3 years (firearm spec, mandatory) + 3 years (weapons under disability), to run consecutively for a 14-year aggregate sentence.
On appeal Elmore argued the conviction was against the manifest weight of the evidence and that the 14-year consecutive sentence was erroneous for lack of required findings at sentencing.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether felonious assault conviction was against the manifest weight of the evidence	State: eyewitnesses, Ross's testimony, and Elmore's recorded admissions and trial testimony support conviction and complicity/instrumentality	Elmore: claimed he only fired warning/cover shots and choked at the last minute; challenged the credibility of witnesses	Court: Affirmed — overwhelming evidence supported guilt either as principal or accomplice; verdict not against manifest weight
Whether consecutive 3+8+3 sentence was lawful without explicit proportionality finding at sentencing hearing	State: consecutive sentence appropriate given statutory factors and prosecutor's request	Elmore: trial court failed to make all R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) findings (specifically proportionality) on the record at sentencing hearing	Court: Vacated sentence and remanded for resentencing — trial court did not make the required on-the-record proportionality finding despite other findings; entry alone insufficient per Bonnell

State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (weight-of-the-evidence standard for reversing convictions)
State v. Hill, 75 Ohio St.3d 195 (deference to factfinder on witness credibility)
State v. DeHass, 10 Ohio St.2d 230 (credibility determinations reserved to trier of fact)
State v. Hand, 107 Ohio St.3d 378 (complicity jury instruction notice)
State v. Keenan, 81 Ohio St.3d 133 (complicity principles)
State v. Bonnell, 140 Ohio St.3d 209 (trial court must make R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) findings on the record; entry cannot cure hearing deficiency)
State v. Foster, 109 Ohio St.3d 1 (context on sentencing-factfinding jurisprudence)
Oregon v. Ice, 555 U.S. 160 (upholding judicial factfinding to impose consecutive sentences)
State v. Hodge, 128 Ohio St.3d 1 (discussing Ice and judicial factfinding post-Foster)
State v. Kalish, 120 Ohio St.3d 23 (appellate review standards for felony sentencing issues)