State v. Phillips
2017 Ohio 1284
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Defendant Cachet M. Phillips was indicted on five counts of felonious assault for allegedly striking an Alero with her vehicle after a fight that began at the Stumble Inn bar on Aug. 2–3, 2014.
- Victim Shayla Williams testified Phillips followed and taunted her car, then struck it at a red light; Williams and an eyewitness (Myrtis Duncan) described the silver Optima wedged under the Alero’s rear bumper and Phillips’s vehicle having fresh damage.
- Officer John Douglas stopped Phillips later, recovered the license plate Williams had peeled off the Optima, and arrested Phillips after she admitted she had been in an accident that evening.
- Phillips’s defense: she was ambushed and struck the Alero while trying to escape; her friend Kierra Scott testified Phillips only “bumped” the Alero and was blocked in by other cars.
- The jury convicted Phillips on all five counts; she appealed arguing (1) improper hearsay admission, (2) convictions against the manifest weight of the evidence, and (3) ineffective assistance of trial counsel. The appellate court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Phillips) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of out-of-court statement overheard at Walmart | Statement was an admission by party-opponent and therefore not hearsay | The remark was hearsay / should have been admitted, if at all, only as a statement against interest under Evid.R. 804(B)(3) | Admission was proper under Evid.R. 801(D)(2)(a) as an admission by a party-opponent; no abuse of discretion |
| Manifest weight of the evidence: sufficiency of mens rea and credibility | Witnesses corroborate intentional conduct: pursuit, taunting, forceful impact, fresh damage to defendant’s car | Either version could be true; jury could not reliably determine who was lying; no proof Phillips knew there were five occupants | Convictions were not against the manifest weight; testimony and corroboration supported intent and knowledge of five passengers |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel (multiple omissions) | Counsel’s choices were reasonable trial strategy; objections would not have changed outcome | Counsel failed to object to officer’s ‘‘fresh damage’’ testimony, hearsay during officer’s testimony, failed to file witness list, did not prepare Scott, and failed to object to a prosecutor remark | Court applied Strickland: counsel’s performance was not deficient nor prejudicial; officer’s testimony was proper lay opinion/explanation of investigation; no prejudice shown; record supports strategic choices |
Key Cases Cited
- Mauer v. State, 15 Ohio St.3d 239 (Ohio 1984) (standard for reviewing admission of evidence)
- Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (Ohio 1983) (abuse of discretion defined)
- Thompkins v. Ohio, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (Ohio 1997) (manifest-weight standard)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (ineffective-assistance standard)
- DeHass v. State, 10 Ohio St.2d 230 (Ohio 1967) (trial-court credibility role)
- Drummond v. State, 111 Ohio St.3d 14 (Ohio 2006) (police lay-opinion testimony and counsel deference)
- Wilson v. State, 113 Ohio St.3d 382 (Ohio 2007) (factfinder’s advantage in assessing witness demeanor)