2012 Ohio 3551
Ohio Ct. App.2012Background
- Floyd took a truck from Circle K after approach by a frantic man claiming someone was trying to shoot him.
- Dill and Comeione did not consent to Floyd taking the truck; Floyd drove away with the vehicle.
- Floyd abandoned a path to the police and initially drove toward the University area before heading to the police station with police behind.
- Floyd was chased by Officer McKeel after fleeing at speeds and running red lights.
- Floyd was charged with aggravated theft, robbery, felonious assault, and related offenses; the jury found robbery and grand theft but acquitted other counts.
- The trial court merged robbery and grand theft for sentencing and Floyd received a four-year term on robbery.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court erred in instructing duress instead of necessity | Floyd argues the court gave the wrong affirmative defense | State contends evidence did not support either defense | Assignment overruled; no plain error; instruction not warranted |
| Whether Floyd received ineffective assistance of counsel | Counsel properly pursued the defense of duress | No ineffective assistance since no viable defense existed | Assignment overruled; no prejudice shown |
| Whether the convictions are supported by sufficient evidence and are not against the manifest weight | Evidence failed to show intent to steal or deprive owner | Evidence showed Floyd took the truck by force with intent to deprive owner | Assignment overruled; convictions affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Barnes, 94 Ohio St.3d 21 (2002) (plain-error standard for Crim.R. 52(B) applied)
- State v. Wilson, 2011-Ohio-4072 (9th Dist.) (instruction must be correct and complete)
- State v. Terrion, 2011-Ohio-3800 (9th Dist.) (no instruction allowed without legal entitlement)
- State v. Flinders, 2012-Ohio-2882 (9th Dist.) (duress/necessity defenses limited; requires evidence of necessity)
- State v. Getsy, 84 Ohio St.3d 180 (1998) (duress/necessity distinctions; high threshold to warrant instruction)
- State v. Lawson, 2008-Ohio-1311 (2d Dist.) (distinguishes human threat vs. natural force; necessity limited)
- State v. Cross, 58 Ohio St.2d 482 (1979) (standard for admitting duress/necessity instructions)
- State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (1997) (sufficiency review standard; reasonable doubt)
- State v. Otten, 33 Ohio App.3d 339 (9th Dist.) (weight-of-the-evidence review as thirteenth juror)
- State v. Mahoney, 1993 WL 12143 (9th Dist.) (counsel not ineffective for failure to pursue unavailable defense)
- State v. Travis, 2006-Ohio-1048 (9th Dist.) (invoked invited-error doctrine)