2017 Ohio 8386
Ohio Ct. App.2017Background
- Gregory A. Pearce was convicted after a jury trial in Ashland County of one count of domestic violence (R.C. 2919.25(A)), elevated to a third-degree felony based on two prior domestic-violence convictions.
- Victim LaShell Cordwell and Pearce were in a romantic relationship and lived together in Ashland County.
- On April 11, 2015, after drinking at a friend’s house on State Route 604, an altercation occurred in the car; Cordwell left the home bleeding and told a store clerk Pearce hit her.
- Witness testimony diverged about when and where Pearce struck Cordwell; Hazelton saw blood shortly after the couple briefly returned to the friend’s house; Cordwell later told family Pearce backhanded her in the car.
- Ashland County deputies responded, arrested Pearce at his home, and the State tried the case in Ashland County. Pearce moved for acquittal under Crim.R. 29 at the close of the State’s case, arguing venue had not been proven.
- The trial court denied the Crim.R. 29 motion; the jury convicted Pearce and found the prior convictions; Pearce appealed only on the claim that venue was not proven.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the State proved proper venue beyond a reasonable doubt | State: Evidence (location of residence, store, dispatch, deputies) tied the criminal transaction to Ashland County | Pearce: Venue not proven; moving for acquittal should have been granted | Court: Venue properly established in Ashland County; Crim.R. 29 motion properly overruled |
| Whether venue may be established indirectly by circumstances | State: Venue can be proven by facts and circumstances; no requirement of express proof | Pearce: (implicitly) facts insufficient to show the crime occurred in Ashland County | Court: Agrees venue may be established indirectly and here facts permit only the inference of Ashland County venue |
| Whether any other county was shown to be proper venue | State: No evidence showing proper venue in another county | Pearce: Trial in Ashland County prejudicial or improper venue | Court: Record contains no evidence supporting venue elsewhere and no claim of identifiable prejudice; trial venue constitutional |
| Standard for reviewing denial of Crim.R. 29 on venue grounds | State: Sufficiency review requires viewing evidence in light most favorable to prosecution | Pearce: Crim.R. 29 should be granted if venue not proven | Court: Applies sufficiency/Jenks standard and finds evidence sufficient to survive challenge |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (Ohio 1991) (standard for sufficiency review)
- State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (Ohio 1997) (distinguishing sufficiency and manifest-weight review)
- State v. Carter, 72 Ohio St.3d 545 (Ohio 1995) (sufficiency principles in criminal cases)
- State v. Smith, 80 Ohio St.3d 89 (Ohio 1997) (noting limitations on Jenks on other grounds)
- State v. Hampton, 134 Ohio St.3d 447 (Ohio 2012) (venue is a fact the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt unless waived)
- State v. Jackson, 141 Ohio St.3d 171 (Ohio 2014) (venue may be proven directly or indirectly by facts and circumstances)
- United States v. Reed, 773 F.2d 477 (2d Cir. 1985) (substantial-contacts approach to assess venue fairness)
- United States v. Saavedra, 233 F.3d 85 (2d Cir. 2000) (discussing Reed factors for venue constitutionality)
- State v. Dickerson, 77 Ohio St. 34 (Ohio 1907) (venue need not be proved in express terms where no other inference reasonably arises)