State v. Howard
2011 Ohio 2862
Ohio Ct. App.2011Background
- Howard was indicted in B-0703493A for Booker/Canady murders and B-0806325A for Johnson/Redding murders; indictments joined for trial.
- Jury found Howard guilty on all offenses in B-0703493A; for B-0806325A, guilty of aggravated murder/robbery and kidnapping of Redding, acquitted on related specs and Johnson-related offenses.
- Three killings were tied to a drug-dealing scheme by Howard and accomplices, who robbed known drug dealers to profit from drugs.
- Booker homicide: Oct 16, 2002; Booker shot after attempting to reclaim marijuana Howard had taken.
- Canady homicide: Dec 14, 2002; Canady restrained, beaten for Canady’s marijuana, then killed; Malik residence involved.
- Redding homicide: Aug 28, 2002; Redding beaten for Johnson’s stash location, then killed; group later looted Johnson’s home.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was joinder for trial proper? | Howard challenged joinder; joined offenses were improper. | Joinder was prejudicial and violated Crim.R. 8/13; should have been severed. | Joinder was proper; no abuse of discretion; prejudice not shown. |
| Are the Kevin Redding convictions supported by sufficient evidence? | Sufficient evidence supports aggravated robbery, murder, and kidnapping of Redding. | Aggravated robbery lacked evidence of theft from Redding; related convictions fail. | Aggravated robbery against Redding not supported; corresponding convictions reversed. |
| Are the Booker/Canady convictions properly supported and not against weight? | Evidence sufficiently proves Booker and Canady offenses and related weapon-disability conviction. | Some can be challenged for weight and credibility; errors in proceedings possible. | Booker-related convictions and related weapon-disability conviction supported; Canady convictions upheld on weight. |
| Are allied-offense mergers correctly applied post Johnson/Logan? | Some offenses should merge as allied offenses of similar import. | No merger due to separate animus and conduct for each offense. | No allied-offense mergers; offenses were separately punishable due to separate animus/conduct. |
| Did the reliability safeguards for codefendant testimony apply properly? | Codefendant testimony is inherently suspect due to plea deals. | Reliability hearing required to assess credibility. | No reliability hearing required; proper safeguards were present; credibility for jury to weigh. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Johnson, 128 Ohio St.3d 153 (2010-Ohio-6314) (abandoned Rance test; conduct-based allied-offense analysis)
- State v. Rance, 85 Ohio St.3d 632 (1999-Ohio-291) (old allied-offense framework; retainment of elements test prior to Johnson)
- State v. McCoy, 2010-Ohio-5810 (1st Dist. No. C-090599) (cooperating witnesses credibility; reliability hearing not required)
- State v. Logan, 60 Ohio St.2d 126 (1979) (animus framework for kidnapping and separate offenses)
- State v. Kalish, 120 Ohio St.3d 23 (2008-Ohio-4912) (sentencing standards; legality of appellate review)
- State v. Hodge, 2010-Ohio-6320 (128 Ohio St.3d 1) (Ice; not reviving Foster-era consecutive-sentence rules)
- State v. Kuehne, Mar. 6, 1996 (1st Dist. No. C-940971) (review of motions in limine and preservation)