State v. Hunter
2014 Ohio 910
Ohio Ct. App.2014Background
- On July 19, 2011 Salim Suleiman was fatally shot outside Kelley’s Carryout in Akron; Hunter and Alan Lollis were indicted for aggravated murder, murder, and two counts of aggravated robbery with firearm specifications.
- Jury convicted Hunter on all counts; trial court merged counts and sentenced him to 33 years to life on aggravated murder plus the gun specification. Hunter appealed.
- Key evidence: text-message chains linking a 480-area-code contact (identified as “Young Homie” / “Bezz”) to planning a meeting at Kelley’s around the shooting time; a Nokia phone registered to Hunter’s mother was recovered in the victim’s car and contained texts between that phone and the 480 number.
- Witnesses: Lashawna Boswell (Hunter’s aunt) placed Hunter near the cut toward Kelley’s ~1 minute before gunfire but admitted heavy intoxication; Tasha Thomas testified Lollis admitted arranging a robbery and identified Lollis’s number as the 480 contact; Thomas’s recorded interview was played at trial.
- Forensics: two bullets fired from the same gun; no firearm recovered; partial prints and DNA were inconclusive or matched the victim; one hat DNA profile did not match Hunter or the victim.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Hunter) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency / manifest weight of evidence supporting convictions | Evidence (texts linking phones, witness testimony, circumstantial ties) supports inference Hunter participated in armed robbery that caused death | No eyewitness ID, no gun recovered, no physical evidence linking him, unreliable witnesses, phone could be lost | Affirmed — circumstantial evidence sufficient; jury did not lose its way in credibility findings. |
| Jury instructions (credibility and mere presence) | N/A (State opposed some defense requests) | Trial court should have given counsel’s requested instructions re: crimes of dishonesty and that mere presence is not guilt | Affirmed — court adequately covered prior convictions in general credibility instruction; mere-presence instruction was given in substance. |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel (failure to investigate / challenge evidence) | N/A | Counsel failed to object to certain exhibits and failed to introduce exculpatory photos showing cut visibility | Affirmed — record does not show deficient performance; missing outside-record materials prevented review. |
| Admission of recorded prior consistent statement (Thomas) | Recording was admissible under Evid.R. 801(D)(1)(b) to rebut implied charge of recent fabrication | Playing the interview was hearsay/plain error and counsel should have objected (or was ineffective for not objecting) | Affirmed — recorded statement admissible as prior consistent statement; no plain error. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Otten, 33 Ohio App.3d 339 (9th Dist. 1986) (standard for reviewing manifest weight of the evidence)
- State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (1991) (circumstantial and direct evidence have equal probative value)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-part test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- State v. Bradley, 42 Ohio St.3d 136 (1989) (application of Strickland in Ohio)