2020 Ohio 67
Ohio Ct. App.2020Background
- Officer Krieger observed a small clear plastic bag fall from Michael Thompson’s pants pocket as Thompson approached the Ravenna police station; Krieger picked it up and suspected it contained crack cocaine.
- Krieger weighed, packaged, and submitted the bag to the department evidence room and to BCI; BCI testing identified the substance as cocaine, though BCI paperwork reflected a different agency case number that was crossed out and corrected.
- Thompson moved in limine to exclude other-acts evidence; the court granted the motion but defense did not contemporaneously object when the officer, while testifying, twice relayed Thompson’s statement that he had come to obtain a report alleging he had offered drugs to a juvenile.
- The jury convicted Thompson of fifth-degree felony possession of cocaine; the trial court imposed 48 months of community-control sanctions (12 months intensive supervision + 36 months general supervision).
- On appeal the court found the officer’s unsolicited testimony about the juvenile-drug allegation was prejudicial other-acts evidence; the conviction was reversed and remanded for a new trial, and the court also found defense counsel ineffective for failing to object and move for a mistrial on that testimony.
- The court upheld admission of the physical-evidence bag and BCI results (authentication and chain of custody were adequate) and left other sentencing and post-release-control challenges moot given the remand.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Thompson) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admission of other-acts testimony (officer’s statement that Thompson sought a report alleging he offered drugs to a juvenile) | Testimony was background, volunteered narrative of why defendant was at station; not evidence of a separate crime and not prejudicial. | Testimony introduced separate, highly prejudicial drug allegation (involving a juvenile) and violated Evid.R. 404(B)/403; trial court’s inaction was reversible error. | Reversed: officer’s direct testimony as elicited was prejudicial other-acts evidence; reversal and new trial granted. |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to object/move for mistrial and for eliciting other-case references | Trial strategy: defense counsel’s questions and failure to object were tactical and invited the issue; no prejudice given eyewitness testimony. | Counsel’s failure to object to plainly prejudicial testimony and failure to move for mistrial was deficient and prejudiced outcome. | Reversed on ineffective assistance: counsel’s omission re: officer’s juvenile-drug testimony was deficient and prejudicial. |
| Authentication and chain of custody of exhibits (BCI submission form and lab report) | State: witness testimony connected the evidence bag and BCI paperwork; any discrepancies (crossed case numbers) did not show break in custody. | Defense: alterations to BCI forms created substantial question whether BCI tested the seized item. | Affirmed: authentication and chain of custody were adequate; any discrepancies go to weight, not admissibility. |
| Other claims (manifest weight, sentence legality, post-release-control notice) | State: evidence (eyewitness) supported conviction; sentence within statutory bounds; post-release control not triggered because community control imposed. | Thompson challenged manifest weight, sentence, and post-release-control notification. | Moot / not reached due to remand for new trial; trial-court sentencing and post-release-control issues ruled unnecessary to decide. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Morris, 132 Ohio St.3d 337 (Ohio 2012) (appellate review of Evid.R. 404(B) is for abuse of discretion)
- State v. Williams, 134 Ohio St.3d 521 (Ohio 2012) (Evid.R. 404(B) framework and permissible purposes for other-acts evidence)
- State v. Barnes, 94 Ohio St.3d 21 (Ohio 2002) (plain-error test and limits on notice under Crim.R. 52(B))
- State v. Tench, 156 Ohio St.3d 85 (Ohio 2018) (strict requirements for establishing plain error affecting substantial rights)
- State v. Frazier, 115 Ohio St.3d 139 (Ohio 2007) (failure to timely object to limine ruling results in plain-error review)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (two-prong ineffective-assistance-of-counsel standard)
- Old Chief v. United States, 519 U.S. 172 (U.S. 1997) (unfair prejudice from propensity evidence can outweigh probative value)
- Michelson v. United States, 335 U.S. 469 (U.S. 1948) (policy reasons for excluding propensity evidence)