2023 Ohio 91
Ohio Ct. App.2023Background
- On Feb. 16, 2018 multiple rounds were fired into the rear of 122 Lorenz Ave., an occupied residence in Dayton; 22‑year‑old Keyona Murray was killed (pregnant at the time).
- Defendant Brandon Leigh (17 at the time) was connected by circumstantial evidence: Facebook Messenger exchanges (account "Brando So Humble") about a missing gun and threats, witness testimony placing him near the scene, and a witness (Angela Williams) who said Leigh confessed.
- Leigh was arrested after transfer from juvenile court; charged with murder, involuntary manslaughter, improper discharge of a firearm into a habitation (each with firearm specs), and having weapons while under disability.
- At trial Williams failed to appear and the court played audio of her juvenile probable‑cause‑hearing testimony; the jury convicted Leigh on all counts and the court sentenced him to aggregate 30 years to life plus restitution.
- On appeal Leigh raised five assignments: (1) erroneous admission of Williams’s prior testimony; (2) erroneous admission of Facebook messages (authentication/hearsay/prior acts); (3) ineffective assistance of counsel; (4) cumulative error; and (5) insufficiency/manifest weight of the evidence. The court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Leigh) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of Angela Williams’s prior juvenile-court testimony | Prior recorded testimony is admissible because witness was unavailable and had been cross‑examined previously | Admission violated Confrontation Clause and hearsay rules; unavailability and prior cross‑examination were inadequate | Court: Williams was unavailable despite subpoena/warrant and reasonable efforts; her juvenile counsel had opportunity and similar motive to cross‑examine; prior testimony admissible; no Confrontation violation |
| Authentication/hearsay of Facebook Messenger records | Records were authenticated (stipulated Facebook business records, recipient testimony identifying account and messages); defendant’s own messages are admissions | Leigh argued the State failed to prove he authored the account/messages and that many entries were hearsay/prior bad acts | Court: Authentication threshold met (business records + recipient ID); many messages were party admissions or non‑assertive questions; admission proper; not unfairly prejudicial under Evid.R. 404(B)/R.C. 2945.59 |
| Sufficiency and manifest weight (discharge into habitation and identity of shooter) | Evidence (bullet trajectories, casings, multiple strikes, Facebook messages, witnesses placing Leigh nearby/confession) supported knowing discharge and identity | Leigh argued no direct proof he possessed or fired a gun or knew a bullet would hit the house; no eyewitness saw shooter | Court: Circumstantial evidence sufficed to prove knowing discharge and identity; convictions not against manifest weight or legally insufficient |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel (voir dire, objections) | N/A (State responds that counsel’s choices were strategic and objections lacked merit) | Leigh faults counsel for not objecting to juror #15, not challenging authentication, and not objecting to prior‑acts evidence | Court: No deficient performance shown; juror stated he could be fair; authentication and other‑acts rulings had merit; no reasonable probability of different outcome |
| Cumulative error | N/A | Multiple trial errors combined deprived Leigh of fair trial | Court: No individual errors found and no reasonable probability result would differ; cumulative‑error claim fails |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967) (standards for counsel filing an Anders brief on appeal)
- Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (U.S. 2004) (testimonial out‑of‑court statements barred unless witness unavailable and defendant had prior opportunity to cross‑examine)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (two‑pronged test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- Thompkins v. Ohio, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (Ohio 1997) (distinction between sufficiency and manifest‑weight review)
- Jenks v. Ohio, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (Ohio 1991) (circumstantial evidence has same probative value as direct evidence)
- Eastley v. Volkman, 132 Ohio St.3d 328 (Ohio 2012) (standard for manifest‑weight review)
- Williams v. State, 134 Ohio St.3d 521 (Ohio 2012) (three‑part test for admissibility of other‑acts evidence under Evid.R. 404(B))
- Neyland v. State, 139 Ohio St.3d 353 (Ohio 2014) (Evid.R. 804 and prior‑testimony admissibility; waiver of confrontation claims)
- Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (Ohio 1983) (abuse‑of‑discretion standard)
- State v. Powell, 132 Ohio St.3d 233 (Ohio 2012) (cumulative‑error doctrine and requirement to first identify multiple errors)