State v. Featherston
2017 Ohio 5487
Ohio Ct. App.2017Background
- Victim Donald Payne (age 70) left his 2007 Honda Ridgeline running; it was stolen with belongings inside including credit cards and a Kahr 9mm handgun. Fraudulent charges (~$3,000) resulted because one card was not canceled.
- Police located the truck in Kenton, Ohio; Charles Featherston was observed driving it and was stopped on June 16, 2016. A Payne credit card was found on Featherston.
- Payne’s truck was insured and ultimately totaled; some personal items were recovered from the truck and from a Kenton residence where Featherston stayed, including a handgun found in a bedroom closet.
- Grand jury indicted Featherston on three counts of Receiving Stolen Property (vehicle, firearm, credit card), Identity Fraud of an elderly person, Forgery, and Having Weapons While Under Disability (latter dismissed pretrial).
- Jury convicted Featherston on five counts (three RSP counts, identity fraud, forgery) and a firearm specification; trial court merged identity fraud and forgery for sentencing and imposed a 57‑month aggregate sentence with fines and restitution.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Whether three R.C. 2913.51 receiving‑stolen‑property counts should merge as allied offenses | State: Counts address distinct property and harms (vehicle, firearm, credit card) so convictions may stand separately | Featherston: All items stolen in one act from one victim; same animus, so counts should merge | Court: No merger — separate, identifiable harms satisfy Ruff’s test (offenses not allied) |
| 2. Whether trial court erred by denying substitution of appointed counsel | State: Trial court properly inquired and found no legal basis for substitution; communication issues were temporary | Featherston: Broke down communication; counsel’s language style prevented effective representation | Court: Abuse‑of‑discretion standard not met; no total breakdown of communication; denial was proper |
| 3. Whether trial court admitted prejudicial hearsay | State: Challenged statements were either non‑hearsay (investigative conduct), from declarants who testified, or harmless if erroneous | Featherston: Multiple witnesses offered hearsay that influenced the jury | Court: No reversible hearsay error; contested statements were permissible or harmless beyond a reasonable doubt |
| 4. Whether convictions were against the manifest weight of the evidence | State: Evidence (identification, recovered items, receipts, video, witness IDs) supported convictions | Featherston: Evidence insufficient/contradicted; jury lost its way | Court: Weight‑of‑evidence review finds credible, competent proof; convictions not against manifest weight |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Ruff, 34 N.E.3d 892 (Ohio 2015) (articulates three‑part test for allied offenses under R.C. 2941.25)
- State v. Skapik, 42 N.E.3d 790 (Ohio Ct. App. 2015) (items stolen in one act from one location may be a single offense)
- State v. Cowans, 717 N.E.2d 298 (Ohio 1999) (standard for substitution of counsel; timeliness and extent of communication breakdown)
- State v. Thompkins, 678 N.E.2d 541 (Ohio 1997) (standard for manifest‑weight review)