State v. Perrymond
2014 Ohio 2863
Ohio Ct. App.2014Background
- Perrymond was convicted by a Medina County jury of aggravated burglary, kidnapping, and robbery arising from a December 26, 2012 attack on Terry Pugh at Pugh’s apartment.
- Pugh testified that Perrymond, with an accomplice, attacked him, restrained him, and that the accomplice took Pugh’s wallet, phone, and cigarettes.
- Police later identified Perrymond as a suspect through information from a confidential informant and the informant’s statements were used to develop the case.
- Pugh later identified Perrymond in a photo lineup with 100% certainty, after detectives showed a lineup that included Perrymond’s photo.
- Perrymond challenged three trial issues on appeal: the use of a confidential informant’s testimony, the weight of the evidence, and the handling of a defendant’s post-arrest silence.
- The appellate court affirmed Perrymond’s convictions, holding the arguments unpersuasive and noting forfeiture of some issues absent plain error.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of CI testimony | Perrymond argues the CI’s identity and involvement should have been excluded. | State contends proper admission, with disclosure to jury not required. | No reversible error; forfeiture and plain-error considerations sustain the ruling. |
| Manifest weight of the evidence | Perrymond contends the evidence does not support convictions. | State asserts the jury’s credibility choices support the verdict. | Convictions not against the manifest weight; record supports the jury’s credibility determinations. |
| Effect of police silence evidence | Perrymond claims the State used his pre-arrest silence improperly as substantive evidence. | State contends questions about silence did not amount to improper use of silence. | No plain error; questions viewed in context did not amount to constitutional error. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. DeHass, 10 Ohio St.2d 230 (1967) (witness credibility and deference to jury determinations)
- State v. Maurer, 15 Ohio St.3d 239 (1984) (trial court evidentiary discretion and trial-court rulings)
- State v. Leach, 102 Ohio St.3d 135 (2004) (fifth-amendment self-incrimination considerations)
- State v. Long, 53 Ohio St.2d 91 (1978) (plain-error standardCrim.R. 52(B))
- State v. Otten, 33 Ohio App.3d 339 (1986) (manifest-weight standard and appellate review)