State v. Norfleet, 2017 Ohio 1189

Willie Norfleet Jr. and his brothers entered Linda Murray's home on Feb. 3, 2016; a gunshot was fired and occupants testified they were threatened and felt they could not safely leave.
Victims (Murray, Brittany Harris, Samantha Crenshaw, Carrie Goff) testified the three men searched the house, displayed or held what appeared to be guns, and one brother fired a shot near a victim.
No weapons were found on the men or in their vehicle when arrested shortly after at a Circle K; shell casing and bullet holes were recovered from the residence consistent with a fired round.
Indictment charged aggravated burglary (with firearm specification), four counts of kidnapping, carrying concealed weapon, weapon under disability, and tampering with evidence.
Jury convicted Norfleet of aggravated burglary (with three-year firearm specification) and four counts of kidnapping; acquitted on remaining counts.
Trial court imposed consecutive sentences totaling 33 years; Norfleet appealed claiming (1) convictions against manifest weight of the evidence and (2) sentencing error for consecutive terms.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether convictions (aggravated burglary, kidnapping) are against the manifest weight of the evidence	State: Victims uniformly testified the three men forced entry, threatened them with guns, restrained their liberty by terror, and a shot was fired; jury credibility finding should stand	Norfleet: Victims were admitted drug users, testimony contained inconsistencies and lacked physical restraint or recovered weapons, so verdict was against the weight of the evidence	Affirmed: Court found judge/jury properly resolved credibility; not an exceptional case warranting new trial
Whether trial court erred in imposing consecutive sentences under R.C. 2929.14(C)(4)	State: Consecutive terms necessary to protect the public and to punish; Norfleet's extensive felony history supports finding under (c)	Norfleet: Trial court failed to properly engage the required statutory consecutive-sentence analysis	Affirmed: Record supports court's findings that consecutive sentences were necessary, not disproportionate, and Norfleet's criminal history justified consecutive terms

State v. Martin, 20 Ohio App.3d 172 (1st Dist. 1983) (standard for granting a new trial on manifest-weight grounds)
State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (Ohio 1997) (distinguishing sufficiency and manifest-weight review)
State v. DeHass, 10 Ohio St.2d 230 (Ohio 1967) (credibility and weight of evidence are for the trier of fact)
Davis v. Flickinger, 77 Ohio St.3d 415 (Ohio 1997) (trial court and jury have superior ability to judge witness demeanor and credibility)
Cross v. Ledford, 161 Ohio St. 469 (Ohio 1958) (definition of clear and convincing evidence)