State v. Steelman
111 N.E.3d 923
Ohio Ct. App.2018Background
- Jury convicted Josh Steelman of burglary and receiving stolen property after police found him hours after the burglary with items from the victims and a bag labeled with a victim’s name; trial court sentenced him to eight years.
- Deputy found Steelman unconscious after an overdose; the truck driver, Justin Callaway, reportedly said there was stolen property in his truck. Police recovered jewelry, coins, and a bag with the victim’s name and about $10,000.
- Jailhouse phone calls and an interview with Detective Wittich included statements by Steelman: apologies to the victims’ son, reference to where documents were burned/found, knowledge of denominations and amount stolen, and refusals to identify alleged third parties.
- Forensic testing placed Steelman’s DNA on a Pepsi can found in the victims’ basement near the safe.
- Defense theory: Steelman was drugged and framed; prosecutor argued the statements and physical evidence showed his guilt. During trial the court admitted unredacted portions of the Wittich interview and Callaway’s excited-utterance remark; prosecutor made several contested closing remarks.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admission of prearrest silence (Wittich interview) | State: interview admissible; defendant later testified so silence could be used to impeach | Steelman: prearrest invocation of counsel and refusals were used as substantive evidence in state’s case-in-chief and violated Fifth Amendment | Error: admission of defendant’s invocation/refusals in state’s case-in-chief violated Fifth Amendment; plain-error review applied; statements should have been redacted but error was not reversible because other evidence overwhelming |
| Admissibility of Callaway’s statement at scene | State: statement admissible as excited utterance | Steelman: statement was hearsay and not an excited utterance; prejudicial | Error: admission under excited-utterance exception was improper; harmless beyond a reasonable doubt given independent evidence of guilt |
| Prosecutor’s closing argument (comments on silence, credibility, epithets) | State: many remarks were permissible inferences from evidence and fair rebuttal to defense themes | Steelman: remarks improperly used his silence, vouched for facts, injected personal opinion, and asserted facts not in evidence | Some remarks improper (including using silence, asserting prosecutor ‘‘knew for a fact’’); most were harmless; misstatement of law was corrected by court and not prejudicial |
| Cumulative/reversible error | State: errors did not affect outcome because evidence of guilt was strong | Steelman: combination of errors deprived him of fair trial | Held: no reversible error; convictions affirmed due to overwhelming independent evidence |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Leach, 102 Ohio St.3d 135 (2004) (using prearrest invocation of counsel or silence in prosecution’s case-in-chief violates the Fifth Amendment)
- Jenkins v. Anderson, 447 U.S. 231 (1980) (once a defendant testifies, prior silence may be used to impeach credibility)
- State v. Barnes, 94 Ohio St.3d 21 (2002) (plain-error standard definition)
- State v. Morris, 141 Ohio St.3d 399 (2014) (harmless-error standard for constitutional and nonconstitutional errors)
- State v. Taylor, 66 Ohio St.3d 295 (1993) (rationale for excited-utterance exception and trustworthiness)
- State v. Sage, 31 Ohio St.3d 173 (1987) (abuse-of-discretion review for evidentiary rulings)