State v. Stringer
2013 Ohio 988
Ohio Ct. App.2013Background
- Defendant Stringer was convicted in Butler County Court of Common Pleas of possession of cocaine with a major drug offender specification.
- Investigation began with vice-unit operation suspecting Stringer of selling drugs; confidential informant arranged a drug purchase from Stringer.
- Police surveillance linked Stringer and his fiancée to a maroon SUV; a drug search followed a warrant at his mother’s residence hallway where five ounces of cocaine were found.
- No drugs were found on Stringer during stops or in his vehicle; body cavity searches occurred with no narcotics discovered.
- Stringer admitted ownership of the cocaine during hospital procedures, on three separate occasions to multiple officers; he was indicted, tried before a jury, and sentenced to 11 years and $10,000 in fines.
- The trial court denied suppression motions; Stringer appealed claiming ineffective assistance of counsel and challenging the sufficiency and weight of the evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance of counsel for withdrawing suppression | Stringer argues withdrawal of suppression prejudiced trial. | Stringer contends counsel’s withdrawal deprived him of suppressing unlawful evidence. | No; withdrawal was tactical and did not prejudice defense. |
| Sufficiency of the evidence to convict | State argues evidence shows possession, including constructive possession. | Stringer asserts insufficient or improperly proven possession. | Conviction supported by sufficient evidence. |
| Conviction against manifest weight of the evidence | State asserts weight supports conviction. | Stringer contends evidence weighs against conviction. | Conviction not against the manifest weight; supported by the record. |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (establishes the two-prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- Madrigal v. State, 87 Ohio St.3d 378 (Ohio 2000) (tactical decision to withdraw suppression may be reasonable defensive strategy)
- Thompkins v. State, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (Ohio 1997) (analysis of sufficiency/weight and credibility considerations)
- State v. Gaefe, 12th Dist. CA2001-11-043, 2002-Ohio-4995 (2002) (circumstantial possession can be proven by circumstantial evidence)
- State v. Contreras, 12th Dist. CA2004-07-181, 2006-Ohio-1894 (2006) (constructive possession evidenced through credibility and inference)