State v. Griffin
2012 Ohio 503
Ohio Ct. App.2012Background
- Griffin and two co-defendants were indicted Apr. 10, 2009 for possession of heroin and later charged with five counts of possessing criminal tools and one count of engaging in a pattern of corrupt activity (Crim.R. 2923.32) based on acts from May 13, 2006 to Apr. 2, 2009.
- Defendant sought a separate trial; the court denied the motion; trial date set for Mar. 1, 2010.
- Co-counsel Daly entered Feb. 23, 2010 and sought substitution of court-appointed counsel and a trial continuance three days before trial; motion denied.
- Griffin and co-defendant Franklin were tried together starting Mar. 2, 2010; Foster pled guilty before trial.
- Griffin was convicted on all counts and sentenced to concurrent five-year prison terms and a $15,000 fine; he timely appealed.
- Trial court opinions on the six assignments of error ultimately overruled Griffin’s challenges.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Indictment sufficiency for pattern of corrupt activity | Griffin—indictment fails to specify each corrupt activity | Indictment defective for lacking specific acts | Indictment not defective; overruled |
| Right to retained counsel and continuance | State’s position supported by timely motions and docket | Abuse of discretion in denying substitution and continuance | No abuse; denial sustained |
| Judicial bias claim | No bias proven by court questioning or conduct | Bias shown by court toward State | No bias demonstrated; assignment overruled |
| Prejudicial joinder of co-defendant | Joinder proper due to same acts and witnesses | Joinder prejudicial; Bruton issues | Joinder proper; no Bruton error; no prejudice shown |
| Prosecutorial misconduct via poster and trial conduct | Poster used for demonstrative purposes, not evidence | Misconduct prejudiced the trial | No reversible prosecutorial misconduct |
Key Cases Cited
- Huffman v. Hair Surgeon, Inc., 19 Ohio St.3d 83 (1985) (abuse of discretion standard for trial decisions)
- Ungar v. Serafine, 376 U.S. 575 (1964) (continuance balancing test; due process considerations)
- Powell v. State, 49 Ohio St.3d 255 (1990) (Unger balancing factors for continuances)
- State v. Murphy, 91 Ohio St.3d 516 (2001) (removal of court-appointed counsel; discretionary ruling)
- Rash v. State, 111 Ohio App.3d 351 (1996) (continuance and counsel decisions within discretion of trial court)
- Jenkins v. Clark, 7 Ohio App.3d 93 (1982) (trial judge may question witnesses to ascertain truth; impartiality presumed)