State v. Frazier
2016 Ohio 727
Ohio Ct. App.2016Background
- Frazier was convicted of robbery in Case No. 2013-CR-3864 and pleaded guilty to having weapons while under disability in Case No. 2013-CR-3946; sentences run concurrently.
- Robbery involved an on-bus theft of Goble’s e-cigarette on Nov. 25, 2013, followed by a fistfight on the bus and Goble’s injury.
- A second incident on Nov. 27, 2013 involved recognition by the bus driver and subsequent police contact; Goble identified Frazier in a photo lineup on Dec. 5, 2013.
- Goble identified Frazier from a six-photo lineup administered by a blind deputy; lineup was computer-generated with tattoos as a noted characteristic.
- The suppression hearing ruled the identification not unduly suggestive; trial proceeded to trial where Frazier was found guilty of robbery and restitution ordered; in a separate case, he pled guilty to having weapons while under disability on Nov. 7, 2014, with concurrent sentencing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pretrial identification admissibility | Goble’s identification was unduly suggestive. | Identification reliability questions go to weight, not admissibility. | Identification not unduly suggestive; admissible. |
| Sufficiency/manifest weight of robbery evidence | State failed to prove force during or immediately after the theft. | Force was contemporaneous with or immediately after theft; video supports. | Evidence supports robbery; not against weight or sufficiency. |
| Lesser-included offense instruction | Theft should have been instructed as lesser included offense. | Theft not warranted; contemporaneous infliction of harm with theft. | No abuse of discretion; no instruction on theft. |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel (pretrial and closing) | Counsel failed to challenge identification reliability and closing-law errors. | Counsel acted reasonably; no prejudice shown. | No deficient performance or prejudice established. |
| Plea advice and DNA-related issues in weapon case | Plea to weapon under disability was not informed and preserved issues. | Guilty plea valid; DNA order not dispositive. | Plea valid; no reversible error shown on counsel performance. |
Key Cases Cited
- Neil v. Biggers, 211 U.S. 188 (U.S. 1972) (identification reliability framework for pretrial identifications)
- Manson v. Brathwaite, 432 U.S. 98 (U.S. 1977) (reliability factors for eyewitness identifications)
- State v. Gardner, 118 Ohio St.3d 420 (2008) (unanimity on alternative means of satisfying an element)