State v. Miller
2016 Ohio 7952
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2016Background
- On February 1, 2015, Rondale Miller went to his aunt's home for his birthday, became upset, and was asked to leave.
- Witnesses testified Miller went to the garage, emerged with a handgun, fired multiple shots into the air while walking from the driveway into the street, and then ran.
- Police recovered five shell casings (one in the driveway, four in the street), tracked footprints in the snow to a shed and a bush, and found a 9mm handgun wrapped in a towel under a bush; Miller was found in the shed.
- Miller was charged with seven offenses (one marijuana count dismissed pretrial); jury convicted him of having a weapon under disability, carrying a concealed weapon, tampering with evidence, obstructing official business, and discharging a firearm on/near prohibited premises; acquitted of possessing a defaced firearm.
- Miller received a total prison term of three years and appealed, arguing his convictions were against the manifest weight of the evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Miller's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether convictions for having a weapon under disability and carrying a concealed weapon were against the manifest weight of the evidence | Witnesses were not credible; inconsistent acquittal on defaced-firearm count undermines verdicts | Multiple witnesses tied the gun to Miller (eyewitnesses, footprint tracking, ballistics); concealment could be on person or in garage | Affirmed: Weight of evidence supports actual or constructive possession and concealment |
| Whether acquittal on possessing a defaced firearm is inconsistent with guilty verdicts | Acquittal shows jury confusion or inconsistent findings | Possessing a firearm and knowing it was defaced are different elements; State lacked evidence Miller knew the serial was filed down | Affirmed: Not inconsistent—knowledge element absent for defaced-firearm count |
| Whether tampering with evidence and obstructing official business convictions were against the manifest weight of the evidence | If Miller did not possess the gun, he could not tamper with or obstruct regarding it | State presented sufficient weight of evidence that Miller possessed the gun | Affirmed: Convictions supported by evidence of possession |
| Whether conviction for discharging a firearm on/near prohibited premises was against the manifest weight of the evidence | State witnesses lacked credibility; undeveloped argument | Victim/witness testimony, shell casings, and ballistics tied the shooting to the gun found near Miller | Affirmed: Court declines to address undeveloped credibility argument; weight supports conviction |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Otten, 33 Ohio App.3d 339 (9th Dist. 1986) (standard for manifest-weight review)
- State v. Martin, 20 Ohio App.3d 172 (1st Dist. 1983) (reversal on manifest-weight grounds reserved for exceptional cases)