State v. Jimenez
2019 Ohio 1693
Ohio Ct. App.2019Background
- Defendant Omar Jimenez traveled from New Jersey with two companions (J.C. and D.T.) who used 21 counterfeit Ohio IDs (with D.T.’s photo) to perform “account lookups” and charge Kohl’s accounts belonging to other people.
- At the Medina Kohl’s, the three selected items, attempted a single transaction for $786.84 using a fake ID, and the transaction was declined; they left in a vehicle.
- Police stopped the vehicle nearby, and with consent found the 21 fake IDs, numerous suitcases/bags of tagged merchandise (mostly from Kohl’s), multiple phones/tablets, and a green backpack that Jimenez claimed as his.
- Loss prevention compiled a spreadsheet showing seven fraudulent purchases at five Kohl’s stores during the four-day trip totaling $3,066.02 (other illicit transactions from the same actors were identified).
- Jimenez was charged with receiving stolen property (R.C. 2913.51(A),(C)), tried by jury, convicted of a fifth-degree felony (property value $1,000–< $7,500), and sentenced to 180 days in jail.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence to support conviction under R.C. 2913.51(A),(C) | State: testimony, surveillance, the recovered IDs/merchandise, and spreadsheet show Jimenez knowingly received property obtained by theft. | Jimenez: he did not know purchases were fraudulent; he only intended to buy some items and did not receive/retain property knowingly. | Court: Evidence sufficient; a rational juror could find elements proven beyond a reasonable doubt. |
| Manifest weight of the evidence (did jury clearly lose its way?) | State: evidence and witness credibility support conviction. | Jimenez: testimony and lack of money/wallet show innocence; evidence weighs against conviction. | Court: Not against manifest weight; jury credibility determinations stand and no miscarriage of justice. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (1997) (standards for sufficiency and manifest-weight review)
- State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (1991) (standard for sufficiency of the evidence)
- State v. Otten, 33 Ohio App.3d 339 (9th Dist. 1986) (manifest-weight review framework)
- State v. DeHass, 10 Ohio St.2d 230 (1967) (trier of fact determines witness credibility)
- State v. Martin, 20 Ohio App.3d 172 (1st Dist. 1983) (manifest-weight reversal reserved for exceptional cases)