State v. Shabazz (Slip Opinion), 146 Ohio St. 3d 404

Background

Early morning bar fight at Tavo Martini Loft: Shabazz, Walker, Johnson, and others formed a group after a spilled-drink incident and repeatedly looked toward victims Anderson and Shannon. Video shows bottles, positioning, and a sequence of assaults ending with a gunshot that killed Shannon.
Walker fired the fatal shot from behind a pillar; Shannon was struck and died. Shabazz was observed patting Walker on the chest and touching his shoulder as they left.
Grand jury indicted Shabazz, Walker, and Johnson on aggravated murder, felony murder (predicated on felonious assault), multiple felonious assault counts (bottle and firearm theories), and a weapons-under-disability charge.
Joint trial: jury convicted Shabazz of aggravated murder and related felonies (some firearm specifications were reportedly found not guilty). Trial court sentenced Shabazz to 22 years to life (20 years to life for aggravated murder, plus consecutive terms).
Court of Appeals (2–1) vacated several convictions for insufficiency of the evidence (finding lack of proof of prior calculation/design and lack of proof Shabazz knew Walker had a gun) but affirmed convictions for felonious assault with a champagne bottle. Appeal to the Ohio Supreme Court was dismissed as improvidently accepted; Justice O’Donnell dissented, arguing the appellate court substituted its judgment for the jury and should have been reversed and remanded.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Shabazz)	Held
Sufficiency review—standard of review for circumstantial evidence	Court of appeals must draw all reasonable inferences in favor of the State; may not adopt defense inferences to reverse.	Appellate court properly vacated convictions because reasonable inferences favored Shabazz and the State’s inferences were not compelled.	Majority dismissed appeal as improvidently accepted; dissent (O’Donnell) would hold the court of appeals erred by substituting its judgment for the jury and would reverse.
Accomplice liability—must accomplice know principal had firearm?	Accomplice can be convicted of felony murder where death is proximate result of underlying felony; accomplice need not know principal had the firearm that caused death.	Without proof Shabazz knew Walker had a gun, proximate-cause element for felony murder is not met.	Dissent: evidence permitted reasonable inference Shabazz knew Walker had a gun; accomplice liability may attach even if accomplice did not specifically know about the firearm. Majority: appeal dismissed (no merits decision).
Felony-murder predicate—which felonious assault may serve as predicate	Any felonious assault proven at trial (including champagne-bottle assaults) may serve as predicate for felony murder; indictment’s firearm specification is a sentencing enhancement, not an element.	Court of appeals held bottle-based felonious assaults could not be the predicate for felony murder because indictment included firearm allegations and because bottle assaults were not proximate causes.	Dissent: jury could find felony murder predicated on bottle-based felonious assault; indictment did not limit predicate because firearm specification is a sentencing enhancement. Majority: appeal dismissed.
Role of appellate court—deference to jury factual findings	Appellate court must view evidence in light most favorable to prosecution and defer to jury’s reasonable inferences.	Appellate court may reverse where reasonable inferences for the State are not supported and where jury’s verdict is not sustained by the evidence.	Dissent: appellate court improperly substituted its own inferences for the jury’s and therefore erred; would reinstate convictions. Majority: appeal dismissed.

Key Cases Cited

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for sufficiency review and deference to factfinder)
State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (circumstantial evidence has same probative value as direct evidence; appellate deference to jury)
State v. McKnight, 107 Ohio St.3d 101 (circumstantial evidence can sustain conviction)
State v. Heinish, 50 Ohio St.3d 231 (same principle on circumstantial evidence)
State v. Filiaggi, 86 Ohio St.3d 230 (sufficiency test: view evidence and reasonable inferences in light most favorable to prosecution)
State v. Johnson, 93 Ohio St.3d 240 (elements of complicity by aiding or abetting)
State v. Cotton, 56 Ohio St.2d 8 (prior calculation and design standard for aggravating-murder)
State v. Solomon, 66 Ohio St.2d 214 (transferred intent doctrine for murder when scheme targets a different person)
State v. Dean, 146 Ohio St.3d 106 (firearm specifications treated as sentencing enhancements)