State v. Reives-Bey
2011 Ohio 1778
Ohio Ct. App.2011Background
- Defendant Trevell Reives-Bey was arrested after a high-speed vehicle pursuit of a minivan used in a Robbery; victims identified him at a show-up and in court.
- Victims Jimnez and Rodaz were robbed at night after being lured to a location near 286 West Miller; property including wallets, phones, and clothes were taken.
- Police description from the 911 call led to a vehicle match and pursuit; a show-up identification occurred within 50 minutes of the robbery.
- Indictment charged multiple offenses including two counts of aggravated robbery, two counts of kidnapping, a firearm specification, failure to comply with police, and grand theft; ultimately only failure to comply and grand theft went to a verdict.
- The jury convicted Reives-Bey only of failure to comply with the order or signal of a police officer and grand theft; other counts were dismissed or resulted in no verdict; the court later remanded on allied offenses issue.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether admission of identification evidence was plain error | Reives-Bey argues identification was improperly obtained | State contends identification reliability supports admissibility | No plain error; identification was reliable enough to admit |
| Whether trial counsel’s failure to pretry suppress identification evidence was prejudicial | Reives-Bey claims ineffective assistance for not filing suppression | State argues no proven prejudice | Not demonstrated; no reasonable probability of different outcome |
| Whether the trial court erred in denying Crim.R. 29 motion | Reives-Bey argues acquittal on several counts should have occurred | State contends evidence supported conviction on at least one count | No reversible error; assignments related to some counts were overruled |
| Whether grand theft conviction is supported; manifest weight challenge | Identification weakness and defense theory undermine weight of evidence | State asserts sufficient and credible identification evidence | Not clearly misweighed; conviction upheld for grand theft; weight not shown to be clearly against evidence |
| Whether robbery and grand theft are allied offenses requiring merger | Convictions may be merged under allied offenses doctrine | May be separate offenses payable unless separate animus shown | Remanded to determine whether robbery and grand theft were committed separately or with separate animus; potential merger ordered |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Johnson, 2010-Ohio-6314 (2010) (applies conduct-based approach to allied offenses and requires remand for animus inquiry)
- State v. Otten, 33 Ohio App.3d 339 (1986) (appellate review of manifest weight involves weighing all evidence and credibility)
- State v. Reyna, 1985-Ohio-79 (1985) (illustrates separate offenses doctrine when acts occur with separate animus)
- State v. Brown, 2008-Ohio-4569 (2008) (reiterates conduct-focused analysis for allied offenses)