State v. Schellentrager
2017 Ohio 9275
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- In July 2016, Martin Schellentrager (age 65) was indicted for one count of kidnapping (R.C. 2905.01(B)(1)) after an incident at an ice arena where he put his arm around a 10-year-old boy and walked him toward the main exit.
- The boy and a bystander testified the boy was scared and that Schellentrager led or "bear-hugged" the child toward the door; the victim said he could not tell his father because Schellentrager held him.
- Arena staff intervened; Schellentrager left and was later located at a nearby motel where he admitted hugging the boy and alleged he wanted to treat the child to snacks.
- At trial the court acquitted Schellentrager of kidnapping but convicted him of the lesser-included offense of abduction (R.C. 2905.02(A)(1) or (2)).
- The trial court sentenced him to five years of community control sanctions; Schellentrager appealed arguing insufficiency of the evidence (Crim.R. 29) as to both kidnapping and the abduction conviction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the evidence at close of state’s case was sufficient to deny Crim.R. 29 on kidnapping/abduction | State: evidence could show force or restraint and risk/fear sufficient for abduction; reasonable minds could differ on kidnapping risk element | Schellentrager: state failed to prove elements (specifically substantial risk of serious physical harm for kidnapping); alternatively, insufficient for abduction | Court: Crim.R. 29 properly denied; sufficient evidence supported conviction for lesser-included abduction |
| Whether conviction for abduction (lesser-included) was supported by evidence | State: placing arm around child and leading him away, child’s fear, and witness description constitute force/constraint or restraint creating risk/fear | Schellentrager: conduct was benign—intended to direct child to concession stand; no force or threat and no intent to harm | Court: conduct (arm around shoulder, bear-hug, moving child) constituted sufficient physical exertion or restraint to support abduction conviction |
Key Cases Cited
- Lytle v. State, 49 Ohio St.3d 154 (lesser-included offenses are charged when greater offense is indicted)
- State v. Murphy, 91 Ohio St.3d 516 (standard for reviewing sufficiency of evidence)
- State v. Walker, 150 Ohio St.3d 409 (appellate review applies Jenks/Crim.R. 29 sufficiency standard)
- State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (sufficiency standard: view evidence in light most favorable to prosecution)