State v. Phillips, 2017 Ohio 1186

On Aug. 29, 2013, B.P. sat in a borrowed car with a firearm in his lap; R.L. (a minor) approached, drew a gun, grabbed B.P.’s weapon and demanded property.
During a struggle as P.W. approached the car, R.L. shot P.W.; after the initial shot a group including Phillips beat P.W., who later died; R.L. emptied P.W.’s pockets.
Surveillance video showed Phillips and others together in the market before the incident, Phillips moving into blind spots near the car, then participating in the post-shooting assault; social-media photos showed Phillips associating with R.L. and other participants.
Phillips was tried and convicted by a jury of complicity to commit felony murder (predicated on aggravated robbery), complicity to commit aggravated robbery (R.C. 2911.01(A)(3)), felonious assault, and related firearm specifications; the trial court imposed consecutive sentences and later accepted a guilty plea to participating in a criminal gang.
On appeal Phillips argued (1) insufficient evidence for complicity convictions, (2) verdicts against the manifest weight of the evidence, and (3) erroneous admission of social-media photographs.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence for complicity to aggravated robbery/felony murder	State: circumstantial and eyewitness evidence show Phillips aided/abeted planning and execution of aggravated robbery that proximately caused P.W.’s death	Phillips: insufficient proof he aided or encouraged the robbery; presence alone insufficient	Court: Evidence (video, eyewitnesses, conduct, photos) permits reasonable inference Phillips was complicit; sufficiency upheld
Manifest weight of the evidence	State: testimony and video are consistent enough; circumstantial proof supports complicity	Phillips: witness accounts differ from video, no proof of verbal encouragement, inconsistent verdicts (acquitted re: B.P.)	Court: after weighing credibility and conflicts, evidence does not weigh heavily against verdicts; convictions not against manifest weight
Admissibility of social-media photos	State: photos show prior close associations with R.L. and others, making innocence less probable	Phillips: photos irrelevant and prejudicial	Court: photos were relevant to connection/association; trial court did not abuse discretion in admitting them
Jury inconsistency argument (verdicts)	—	Phillips: inconsistent acquittal on aggravated robbery of B.P. but guilty on P.W. undermines verdict	Court: not raised as a separate trial-court error; inconsistency does not undermine weight of evidence for conviction as to P.W.

Thompkins v. Ohio, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (legal standard for sufficiency and appellate review) (explains standard of review for sufficiency challenges)
State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (1991) (jury may draw reasonable inferences; sufficiency standard)
State v. Shabazz, 146 Ohio St.3d 404 (2016) (complicity statute and that aider/abettor is guilty as principal)
State v. Otten, 33 Ohio App.3d 339 (9th Dist.) (standard for manifest-weight review)
State v. Martin, 20 Ohio App.3d 172 (1st Dist.) (rare reversal standard where evidence weighs heavily against conviction)
State v. Dean, 146 Ohio St.3d 106 (2015) (abuse-of-discretion review for relevancy/evidentiary rulings)
State v. Sage, 31 Ohio St.3d 173 (1987) (trial-court discretion in admitting evidence under Evid.R.)
State v. Johnson, 93 Ohio St.3d 240 (2001) (complicity inference from presence, companionship, and conduct)