State v. Pari
2017 Ohio 4165
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- On May 18, 2015, Trooper Laughlin stopped a pickup; defendant Robert Pari was the front-seat passenger and the truck was registered to him. A black leather fanny pack in the truck bed behind the passenger seat contained drugs (hydromorphone, cathinone) and syringes; a nearby purse contained other contraband the State did not rely on.
- The female driver told the trooper the purse belonged to her and that the fanny pack belonged to Pari; trooper matched lot numbers on condoms found in Pari’s pockets to those in the fanny pack and tested that a charger in the fanny pack fit Pari’s flip phone.
- Pari was tried by jury and convicted of aggravated possession of drugs (felony) and possession of drug abuse instruments (misdemeanor). The trooper was the sole witness at trial.
- At sentencing the court imposed a two-year community-control package (verbally) and stated that a violation could result in up to 12 months’ incarceration; the written entry described 12 months’ incarceration suspended pending two years of community control and only referenced the misdemeanor plea for the lesser count.
- Pari appealed, raising sufficiency, jury-instruction on constructive possession, manifest-weight, and sentencing errors. The appeals court affirmed the convictions (sufficiency and weight), rejected the jury-instruction challenge, but reversed and remanded on sentencing grounds.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Pari) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence to submit possession charges to jury | Evidence (driver’s statement, location of fanny pack, matching condoms, charger fit, truck registration, Pari’s nervousness) established constructive possession | No direct proof trooper saw Pari own the contraband; discrepancies in trooper report vs testimony | Affirmed: Evidence sufficient for constructive possession and convictions |
| Manifest weight of the evidence | Trooper testimony and circumstantial indicia supported verdicts; jury entitled to credit trooper | Trooper credibility weak; contraband could have belonged to driver; trooper’s report inconsistent | Affirmed: Not an exceptional case; jury did not lose its way |
| Jury instruction on constructive possession | Instruction correctly stated law on dominion/control, circumstantial evidence, and insufficiency of mere access | Instruction was misleading/omitted "authority" element and risked convicting someone unaware of drugs | Affirmed: Instruction was a correct statement of law and appropriate to facts |
| Sentencing: one community-control package for multiple convictions and inadequate notice of possible prison term | Court gave appropriate community control and warned of up to 12 months if violated | Pari argued sentencing-package for multiple counts and failure to provide proper statutorily required notice at hearing made sentence contrary to law | Reversed/remanded: Sentence contrary to law (sentencing-package error and statutory notice deficiency); remand for resentencing |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (sufficiency standard and weight of the evidence framework)
- State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (standard for sufficiency review in Ohio)
- State v. Saxon, 109 Ohio St.3d 176 (prohibition on omnibus sentencing package for multiple offenses)
- State v. Marcum, 146 Ohio St.3d 516 (standard for appellate review of felony sentences)
- State v. Otten, 33 Ohio App.3d 339 (manifest-weight standard for appellate courts)