State v. Jones
2017 Ohio 385
Ohio Ct. App.2017Background
- Defendant Jihard Jones was indicted on multiple counts stemming from a July 19, 2015 incident in which he engaged a transgender sex worker (Tameka Braggs) for paid sex; after the encounter a gun owned by Jones's girlfriend was displayed and a struggle for the gun ensued.
- Braggs testified Jones pointed a handgun at her, demanded his money back, they struggled, the gun discharged (a casing was later found jammed in the gun), and she flagged down police after temporarily possessing the firearm. DNA on a condom and wipe matched Jones and Braggs.
- The trial court acquitted Jones of one firearm discharge count and reduced felonious assault to misdemeanor assault, but convicted him of two counts of aggravated robbery, kidnapping, assault, improper handling of a firearm in a motor vehicle, and two counts of having a weapon while under disability, plus specifications.
- The court imposed concurrent base terms that amounted to a three-year base sentence, then added a merged three-year firearm specification consecutive to one aggravated-robbery term, producing a six-year total; the court nonetheless also sentenced on both aggravated-robbery counts despite later finding them to merge.
- On appeal Jones challenged (1) manifest weight of the evidence supporting the convictions and (2) failure to properly merge allied offenses for sentencing; the State conceded merger error for the two aggravated-robbery counts and the kidnapping count.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether convictions (aggravated robbery, kidnapping, assault, improper handling of firearm, weapons-under-disability) are against the manifest weight of the evidence | State argued the testimony, physical evidence (DNA, gun with spent casing), and inferences about access to the gun supported convictions | Jones argued victim inconsistent, failed to ID him in photo array, contradictions about casing and firearm discharge, and victim's post-event taunting undermined fear | Court: Not an exceptional case; weighed credibility in favor of conviction. Manifest-weight challenge overruled |
| Whether aggravated-robbery counts and kidnapping count were allied offenses for sentencing | State ultimately conceded that the two aggravated-robbery counts and the kidnapping count should merge | Jones argued they were allied and should be merged for sentencing | Court: Sustained; convictions merge for sentencing; remanded for resentencing and State to elect count for sentence |
| Whether trial court erred by sentencing separately on merged aggravated-robbery counts | N/A (State conceded error) | Jones argued duplicate sentences on merged offenses was erroneous | Court: Agreed; vacated sentence and remanded for resentencing to correct merged counts |
| Whether firearm specifications and sentencing sequence produced a valid aggregate sentence | State maintained specifications appropriately applied and merged into single spec to run consecutive to base term | Jones contested sentencing calculation and duplicate sentences after merger findings | Court: Merged firearm specifications into single 3-year spec but vacated overall sentence and remanded for resentencing after merging allied offenses |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380, 678 N.E.2d 541 (Ohio 1997) (standard for manifest-weight review)
- State v. DeHass, 10 Ohio St.2d 230, 227 N.E.2d 212 (Ohio 1967) (trial court credibility determinations entitled to deference)
- State v. Antill, 176 Ohio St. 61, 197 N.E.2d 548 (Ohio 1964) (courts may believe all, part, or none of a witness's testimony)
- State v. Wilson, 113 Ohio St.3d 382, 865 N.E.2d 1264 (Ohio 2007) (factfinder best positioned to observe witness demeanor)