State v. Figueroa
110 N.E.3d 612
Ohio Ct. App.2018Background
- On May 16, 2015, Jamie Figueroa entered a Speedway, stole beer and snacks, and was confronted by employee Diana Higley.
- Higley found Figueroa outside drinking; Figueroa produced a steak knife, screamed, and then struck Higley in the mouth, causing significant injury (12 stitches, tooth/root damage).
- Witness Darrell Thompson observed the assault, found a knife nearby after Figueroa fled, and testified Figueroa asked him if he "wanted some too" while approaching with the knife at his side.
- Deputy Barger arrested Figueroa nearby; witnesses identified him at the scene. The grand jury indicted him on three counts of felonious assault (two against Higley — knife and fist — one against Thompson — knife) and one count of petty theft.
- A jury convicted on all counts; the court merged the two Higley assault counts, sentenced Figueroa to a total of eight years, and imposed three years post-release control.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court erred by not giving a curative instruction after hearsay/opinion testimony from the deputy | State: any improper testimony was minimal; jury had pre-trial instruction that sustained objections mean they must ignore answers | Figueroa: the court should have given an immediate curative instruction after the deputy’s statements and the testimony prejudiced the jury | Court: No abuse of discretion; pre-testimony instruction sufficed and testimony about Thompson finding the knife was also given by Thompson himself |
| Sufficiency of evidence for felonious assault against Thompson (R.C. 2903.11(A)(2)) | State: Figueroa’s actions (punching Higley while holding a knife, stepping toward Thompson, verbal threat) constituted a substantial step and supported a finding of intent to cause harm | Figueroa: prosecution failed to prove he intended to harm Thompson; conduct was preparatory and insufficient for felonious assault | Court: Evidence sufficient; juror could infer a substantial step toward knowingly causing harm with a deadly weapon |
| Sufficiency of evidence for felonious assault against Higley with a knife (R.C. 2903.11(A)(2)) | State: Striking Higley with a fist while holding a knife constituted an overt act toward causing harm with a deadly weapon | Figueroa: He had turned the knife blade backward, so there was no overt act to use the knife to harm Higley | Court: Holding the knife in the hand used to strike was more than intimidating — it was an overt act supporting felonious assault conviction |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Frost, 14 Ohio App.3d 320 (11th Dist. 1984) (standard of review for cautionary instructions)
- State v. Ferranto, 112 Ohio St. 667 (Ohio 1925) (abuse of discretion explained)
- State v. Seiber, 56 Ohio St.3d 4 (Ohio 1990) (intent may be inferred from conduct and circumstances)
- State v. Woods, 48 Ohio St.2d 127 (Ohio 1976) (substantial-step test for attempt)
- State v. Workman, 84 Ohio App.3d 534 (9th Dist. 1992) (stepping toward a victim with a knife can be a substantial step)
- State v. Brown, 97 Ohio App.3d 293 (8th Dist. 1994) (verbal threats and violent behavior can support felonious-assault findings)
- State v. Brooks, 44 Ohio St.3d 185 (Ohio 1989) (distinguishing preparatory acts from substantial steps for felonious assault)
- State v. Troisi, 179 Ohio App.3d 326 (11th Dist. 2008) (sufficiency review standard)