State v. Smallwood
2025 Ohio 1001
Ohio Ct. App.2025Background
- Jochua Smallwood was convicted at a consolidated bench trial of attempted murder, abduction, felonious assault, domestic violence, violating a protection order (five counts), and intimidation of a victim, all arising from a violent incident involving his then-girlfriend (H.S.) on May 4, 2022, and subsequent acts while in custody.
- The incident involved Smallwood assaulting and strangling H.S. after accusing her of infidelity, leading to her near-loss of consciousness, followed by further confinement and threats.
- After escaping, H.S. contacted police, who documented her injuries and statements; Smallwood fled but later confessed via text messages.
- Smallwood was subsequently indicted on additional charges for violating protection orders and intimidating the victim from jail.
- At trial, Smallwood raised claims of self-defense and challenged the admission of evidence of his prior violent offenses against other girlfriends; he was sentenced to an aggregate 24-year prison term, with some offenses merged at sentencing by party stipulation.
Issues
| Issue | Smallwood's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency and weight of evidence for attempted murder | Insufficient and against manifest weight; evidence did not support intent to kill | Sufficient, credible evidence supported purpose to kill via strangulation | Evidence sufficient and not against manifest weight |
| Merger of abduction/domestic violence offenses | Abduction and domestic violence should merge into attempted murder | Each offense was separate in conduct and harm | Not allied; offenses were committed separately |
| Admission of prior bad acts evidence | Improper, prejudicial admission in violation of Evid.R. 404(B) | Properly admitted for intent, not propensity, after self-defense claim | Permissible under Evid.R. 404(B); no plain error |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel | Counsel failed to argue merger, failed to object to other-acts evidence | Counsel's decisions were reasonable and consistent with trial strategy | No ineffective assistance; no prejudice established |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Ruff, 143 Ohio St.3d 114 (clarifies test for allied offenses of similar import for merger)
- State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (defines sufficiency and manifest weight standards)
- State v. Williams, 134 Ohio St.3d 521 (addresses admissibility of other acts evidence under Evid.R. 404(B))
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (sets standard for ineffective assistance of counsel)