State v. Howze
2013 Ohio 4800
Ohio Ct. App.2013Background
- Defendant Corey J. Howze was tried in two Franklin County cases: a jury trial in 11CR-5831 (robbery/related counts) and a bench trial in 12CR-1183 (having a weapon while under disability with firearm specification). The jury convicted on one robbery count; the judge convicted on the weapon-under-disability count and the firearm specification. Total sentence imposed: 9 years (7 + 1 + 1).
- Victim C.R. testified that Howze and his girlfriend assaulted her, stripped and confined her in a basement, forced drug use and sexual acts, took property, and that Howze put a gun to her head; physical injuries, clumps of her hair in the basement, a notebook with her personal data at Howze’s home, and a shotgun with Howze’s fingerprints were introduced to corroborate her account.
- Howze denied many allegations, claimed the girlfriend was mainly responsible, and presented family witnesses who said they saw C.R. uninjured and no fight. Howze admitted some facts (C.R. was beaten; he had written information in a notebook; a shotgun was in the house) but disputed the more serious claims.
- Procedurally: one kidnapping count dismissed before trial; jury acquitted on one robbery count and rape count, and hung on kidnapping (mistrial). After convictions, Howze appealed asserting (1) insufficiency/manifest weight error and (2) improper consecutive sentencing.
- Trial court sentenced consecutively but did not make the statutory on-the-record findings required by R.C. 2929.14(C)(4); appellate court affirmed guilt but vacated sentence and remanded for resentencing because the required consecutive-sentence findings were not made.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency/manifest weight of evidence for robbery and having weapon while under disability | State: C.R.’s testimony plus corroborating physical evidence (injuries, hair, notebook, operable shotgun with defendant’s fingerprints) supports convictions | Howze: C.R. not credible (drug user), jury’s mixed verdicts show doubt, defendant and family testimony offers plausible innocent explanation | Affirms convictions; verdicts not against manifest weight and were supported by sufficient evidence |
| Validity of consecutive sentences without on-the-record findings under R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) | State: issue not raised at trial; argues no plain error or that record suffices | Howze: trial court failed to make the required statutory findings on the record for consecutive non-mandatory sentences | Reverses sentence and remands for resentencing; trial court failed to make the statutorily required findings, so consecutive sentence vacated |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (1997) (standard for manifest-weight review)
- State v. Martin, 20 Ohio App.3d 172 (1st Dist. 1983) (appellate court as "thirteenth juror" standard explanation)
- State v. Getsy, 84 Ohio St.3d 180 (1998) (sufficiency of evidence vs. manifest weight distinction)