State v. McFarland
2022 Ohio 4638
Ohio Ct. App.2022Background
- McFarland was convicted by a jury of aggravated murder and related charges for the November 2015 killing of Robert Williams; she received life without parole, later reduced on remand to 20-to-life plus 3 years on a firearm spec (aggregate 23-to-life).
- Facts at trial: Williams had been a confidential informant after controlled buys; supplier Eddie Brownlee suspected Williams of snitching; Brownlee directed others (including codefendant Ryan Motley) to harm Williams; Motley shot Williams; Motley testified against McFarland.
- McFarland was not at the shooting scene; her defense argued no overt acts connected her to a murder conspiracy, but the jury convicted her; appellate and Ohio Supreme Court review affirmed the convictions (with remand for allied-offense merger).
- Before resentencing, McFarland filed (under seal) a motion for leave to file a delayed Crim.R. 33(A)(6) new-trial motion, claiming she was misdiagnosed and improperly medicated while jailed and therefore was incompetent to assist at trial; she submitted jail and prison medical records, school records, a prior presentence report, and journal articles.
- The trial court resentenced per mandate and denied McFarland’s motion for leave as moot; she appealed that denial, arguing the court erred in refusing to allow a delayed new-trial motion based on newly discovered evidence of incompetence/misdiagnosis.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether McFarland was unavoidably prevented from discovering evidence of misdiagnosis/ incompetence such that she should get leave to file a delayed Crim.R. 33(A)(6) motion | State: McFarland failed to show by clear and convincing evidence that she was unavoidably prevented from discovering her medical/mental-health history before trial | McFarland: psychiatric treatment in prison revealed a prior misdiagnosis and inappropriate jail medication; thus she could not have discovered or produced that evidence earlier and was incompetent at trial | Court: Denied leave — records show longstanding mental-health history and cognitive deficits available pretrial; no expert or affidavit showing prior misdiagnosis or incompetence; McFarland failed to prove unavoidable prevention by clear and convincing evidence |
Key Cases Cited
- Cross v. Ledford, 161 Ohio St. 469 (defines the clear-and-convincing evidence standard)
- State v. Bethel, 167 Ohio St.3d 362 (trial court may not decide merits of proposed new-trial motion before granting leave)
- State v. Hackett, 164 Ohio St.3d 74 (explains abuse-of-discretion review)
- Johnson v. Abdullah, 166 Ohio St.3d 427 (abuse-of-discretion standard and limits on appellate substitution of judgment)
- State v. McConnell, 170 Ohio App.3d 800 (hearing on leave to file requires documents that, on their face, support unavoidable-prevention claim)
- Thomas v. Cleveland, 176 Ohio App.3d 401 (abuse of discretion may be found for misapplication of legal standard)