State v. Gindlesperger, 2017 Ohio 7478

Background

In March 2015 Trooper Zachary Coleman stopped a car on I‑71 for speeding (76 mph in a 60 mph zone) and contacted driver Richard D. Gindlesperger, Jr.
Trooper observed strong odor of alcohol, bloodshot/glassy eyes, and marked nervousness; he requested field sobriety testing and Gindlesperger said “he can’t do it, he’s sorry” and fled.
Trooper pursued at high speed, lost sight of the vehicle after a dust cloud; dash‑cam video of the stop and flight was played to the jury.
Gindlesperger later met with the trooper two days after the incident, invoked Miranda, and declined to answer; no breath test was given due to delay.
Indictment charged two DUI counts (with prior‑offender specifications) and two failure‑to‑comply counts (with “furthermore” specifications alleging substantial risk of serious physical harm and fleeing after a felony); jury found him guilty on all counts.
Trial court merged duplicate counts and sentenced Gindlesperger to an aggregate eight years’ imprisonment; he appealed raising sufficiency/manifest‑weight, challenge to the flight jury instruction, and weight issue as to the furthermore clauses.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence for DUI convictions	State: Trooper’s observations (odor, bloodshot eyes, nervousness), speeding, refusal to submit to tests, and flight support a rational trier finding impairment	Gindlesperger: State presented no direct proof of impairment; alternative explanations (mother’s spray; his abstinence) undermine proof	Affirmed — viewing evidence in prosecution’s favor a rational juror could find impairment beyond reasonable doubt
Manifest weight of evidence for DUI convictions	State: testimonial and video evidence credible; jury entitled to reject defense explanations	Gindlesperger: Jury’s verdict is against weight because mother’s alcohol‑smell explanation and his testimony showed he did not drink	Affirmed — appellate court will not substitute its judgment for jury; not an extraordinary case warranting reversal
Validity of furthermore clauses for failure to comply (risk of serious physical harm; fleeing after felony)	State: Trooper’s testimony and dash‑cam (dust cloud, near‑collision) support findings that driving created substantial risk and that defendant fled after committing a felony	Gindlesperger: Trooper’s speed estimates conflicted with defendant’s; no direct proof another car was forced off road	Affirmed — jury credited trooper; evidence sufficient and weight not against convictions
Appropriateness of “flight / consciousness of guilt” jury instruction	State: Flight evidence (fleeing, hiding, delayed contact) permits inference of consciousness of guilt; instruction neutral and allowed	Gindlesperger: Instruction improperly permitted jury to infer DUI despite lack of impairment evidence	Affirmed — trial court did not abuse discretion in giving flight instruction where record contained adequate evidence of flight

Key Cases Cited

State v. Diar, 120 Ohio St.3d 460 (Ohio 2008) (sufficiency standard following Jenks and Jackson)
State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (Ohio 1997) (distinguishing sufficiency from manifest weight review)
State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (Ohio 1991) (standard for sufficiency of the evidence)
State v. Schmitt, 101 Ohio St.3d 79 (Ohio 2004) (physiological and coordination indicators as proof of impairment)
State v. Wilson, 113 Ohio St.3d 382 (Ohio 2007) (manifest weight appellate standard — whose evidence is more persuasive)
State v. Martin, 20 Ohio App.3d 172 (Ohio Ct. App.) (guidance on reversal for manifest miscarriage of justice)
Tibbs v. Florida, 457 U.S. 31 (U.S. 1982) (appellate court as thirteenth juror in weight‑of‑evidence review)
Seasons Coal Co. v. Cleveland, 10 Ohio St.3d 77 (Ohio 1984) (deference to factfinder’s assessment of witness credibility)
State v. Taylor, 78 Ohio St.3d 15 (Ohio 1997) (flight may indicate consciousness of guilt)