State v. May
2025 Ohio 2378
Ohio Ct. App.2025Background
- Vashuad Dwayne May was convicted by a jury of aggravated murder, attempted murder, and related firearm offenses for his role in a drive-by shooting that killed Rawsheem Aponte and injured Aponte’s fiancée and child.
- The attack occurred after a vehicular chase involving multiple cars and ended with a fatal shooting witnessed and later described by Aponte's fiancée.
- Key identification evidence included her eyewitness account and a rap video May posted days prior, showing him wielding a distinctive firearm similar to the one seen in surveillance footage of the shooting.
- Forensic evidence, including surveillance videos and ballistic analysis, could not directly tie May to the physical evidence (e.g., no DNA links), but circumstantial evidence was substantial.
- May was charged and indicted in January 2024; he appealed his convictions on various grounds, including evidentiary sufficiency, trial errors, and the admission of the rap video.
- The Seventh District Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction, rejecting all six assignments of error.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of Evidence | Eyewitness and circumstantial evidence sufficient | No DNA link; eyewitness unreliable; rap video speculative | Sufficient evidence; jury could find identity proven |
| Manifest Weight of Evidence | Jury evaluated credibility; identification rational | Eyewitness untrustworthy; forensic evidence weak | Jury's decision not a miscarriage of justice |
| Admission of Rap Video (First Amendment, Evidentiary error) | Video showed identity, mannerisms, and weapon | Overly prejudicial; protected artistic expression | Properly admitted; high probative value |
| Supplemental Jury Instruction on Circumstantial Evidence | Standard examples appropriate | Example improperly encouraged inference stacking | Instruction in context not prejudicial or erroneous |
| Rejection of Stipulation to Prior Conviction | Proposed stipulation incomplete, omits statutory language | Should have sufficed under Old Chief and Creech | Properly rejected for not tracking statutory requirements |
| Cumulative Error | No individual errors; no cumulative effect | Multiple minor errors accumulate to deny fair trial | No cumulative error; no unfair trial |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (1997) (distinguishing sufficiency from weight of the evidence review)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) (standard for sufficiency of evidence)
- State v. Treesh, 90 Ohio St.3d 460 (2001) (value of circumstantial evidence)
- State v. Creech, 2016-Ohio-8440 (stipulations in weapon disability trials; applied Old Chief rationale)
- Old Chief v. United States, 519 U.S. 172 (1997) (acceptance of stipulations on prior convictions in criminal cases)
- State v. DeHass, 10 Ohio St.2d 230 (1967) (weight and credibility determinations belong to jury)
- Wisconsin v. Mitchell, 508 U.S. 476 (1993) (First Amendment does not bar evidentiary use of speech relevant to crime)