State v. Tensley
2012 Ohio 4265
Ohio Ct. App.2012Background
- Defendant Tensley was charged in B-0908529-A with marijuana trafficking and tampering with evidence, based on disposing of marijuana during the execution of a search warrant.
- He was out on bond with an electronic monitor; bond violations led to a capias.
- The trial judge stated the sheriff would arrest him and Tensley fled the courtroom before any officer arrived.
- A second indictment, B-1001604, charged Tensley with escape for fleeing the courthouse; the two indictments were joined for trial.
- The jury convicted Tensley of tampering with evidence and escape; the trial court sentenced him to concurrent five-year terms, and on appeal the court reversed the escape conviction and remanded for postrelease-control notification, while affirming the tampering conviction and the joinder ruling.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the escape conviction is supported by sufficient evidence | Tensley was under detention when he fled. | There was no arrest or detention at the time of flight; the judge had not arrested him, only stated the sheriff would come. | Escape conviction insufficient; reversed in B-1001604 and Tensley discharged. |
| Postrelease-control notification at sentencing | Failure to inform about postrelease control violates R.C. 2929.191. | Error not cured; postrelease-control should be imposed on remand. | Remand for proper postrelease-control notification in B-0908529-A. |
| Voluntariness of Tensley’s confession to disposing of marijuana | Threat regarding girlfriend rendered confession involuntary. | Totality of circumstances does not render confession involuntary. | Confession voluntary; motion to suppress denied. |
| Joinder of indictments for trial | Joinder was proper since offenses were simple and direct. | Severance could have been granted for prejudice. | No reversible prejudice; joinder affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Barker, 372 N.E.2d 1324 (Ohio 1978) (definition of detention/arrest for purposes of escape statute)
- Lazier v. State, 2009-Ohio-5928 (12th Dist. 2009) (insufficient evidence where no intent to arrest shown before flight)
- State v. Diodati, 601 N.E.2d 69 (11th Dist. 1991) (cases where police clearly intended to arrest; distinguishable from Tensley)
- State v. Jackson, 2005-Ohio-1083 (3d Dist. 2005) (police intended to arrest; distinguishable from Tensley)