State v. Greene
2018 Ohio 3032
Ohio Ct. App.2018Background
- Victim C.G. went to appellant Brandon Greene's mother's house to discuss a family dispute; a confrontation ensued and C.G. was shot in the abdomen.
- C.G. initially identified Greene as the shooter to several officers and at trial; at one point he told prosecutors R.G. (a deceased aunt) shot him but reverted at trial to identifying Greene.
- A neighbor saw two Black males at the scene, one crawling and one with a gun, and a Black female hide the gun; police later recovered the gun in the backyard.
- Greene was indicted for two counts of felonious assault (each with a firearm specification) and one count of having a weapon while under disability; he was tried by jury, found guilty, and found to be a repeat violent offender after a bench determination.
- The trial court merged the felonious-assault counts for sentencing and imposed an aggregate prison term of 15 years, including an oral and written order of five years mandatory post-release control.
- Greene appealed, raising (1) admission of a detective’s testimony about "inner-family violent situations" as an expert without Crim.R. 16(K) disclosure, and (2) erroneous imposition of five years post-release control rather than three.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Greene) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of detective testimony on "inner-family" dynamics | Testimony was lay opinion helpful to jury under Evid.R. 701 and based on officer experience | Testimony was expert opinion; State violated Crim.R.16(K) by not disclosing report; testimony prejudiced Greene | Court treated testimony as potentially expert but found any error non-prejudicial given other evidence; assignment overruled |
| Proper length of mandatory post-release control | Five years imposed (as sentenced by trial court) | Greene argued statutory maximum is three years for his second-degree felony | Court agreed with Greene and State concession; five-year post-release control void; remanded for limited resentencing on post-release control |
Key Cases Cited
- Qualls, 131 Ohio St.3d 499 (2012-Ohio-1111) (trial court must provide statutorily compliant post-release-control notification at sentencing and in the entry)
- Holdcroft, 137 Ohio St.3d 526 (2013-Ohio-5014) (failure to properly impose post-release control renders that portion of the sentence void)