State v. Powell
2021 Ohio 2440
Ohio Ct. App.2021Background
- Powell was convicted in January 2018 of rape, kidnapping (with sexual-motivation spec.), corruption of a minor, and sexually violent predator specifications; sentence imposed May 14, 2018.
- He appealed; convictions were affirmed by this court in State v. Powell, 134 N.E.3d 1270 (8th Dist. 2019).
- On March 31, 2020 (792 days after the verdict), Powell filed a pro se motion for leave to file a motion for new trial, attaching an affidavit from his brother and internet printouts about the HBO documentary I Am Evidence.
- Powell claimed the documentary was newly discovered evidence and supported Brady/prosecutorial and witness misconduct claims; he said incarceration prevented earlier discovery.
- The State showed documentary availability online in April 2018 (before sentencing), and other exhibits dated before trial; the trial court denied leave without a hearing.
- The appellate court affirmed, holding Powell could have discovered the documentary and other materials within Crim.R. 33(B)’s 120-day period by reasonable diligence, so he was not "unavoidably prevented" from filing timely.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court abused discretion denying leave to file delayed motion for new trial | Leave denial proper; exhibits show materials were publicly available before sentencing | Powell: documentary was newly discovered; incarceration prevented discovery within 120 days | Affirmed — evidence (HBO release and other materials) was discoverable by April 2018; Powell not unavoidably prevented from filing timely motion |
| Whether trial court abused discretion by denying an evidentiary hearing on leave motion | No hearing required where movant fails to show unavoidable prevention or prima facie grounds | Powell: facts warranted a hearing because of possible Brady/Crim.R.16 violations and unavoidable prevention | Affirmed — court did not abuse discretion in denying hearing absent showing of unavoidable prevention or new, undiscoverable evidence |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Powell, 134 N.E.3d 1270 (8th Dist. 2019) (prior appeal affirming convictions and reciting trial record)
- State v. Walden, 19 Ohio App.3d 141 (10th Dist. 1984) (defines "unavoidably prevented" standard for delayed new-trial motions)
- State v. Phillips, 95 N.E.3d 1017 (8th Dist. 2017) (abuse-of-discretion standard for denial of leave and for decision to hold evidentiary hearing)