State v. White
142 Ohio St. 3d 277
| Ohio | 2015Background
- White, a former Ottawa Hills police officer, was convicted of felonious assault with a firearm specification for shooting McCloskey Jr. during a traffic stop.
- The Sixth District reversed the felonious assault conviction and struck the firearm specification, citing errors in jury instructions and exclusion of testimony.
- The trial court’s deadly-force instructions did not follow Garner; the court did not give a proper Garner-based standard.
- The court excluded White’s testimony about offenses White believed McCloskey had committed, limiting jury’s assessment of threat perception.
- The majority held the firearm specification unconstitutional as applied to White because he acted within the scope of his duties and did not abandon employment; the case was remanded for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Applicability of R.C. 2941.145(A) to a on-duty officer | White argues the firearm spec cannot apply to an on-duty officer | State argues statute applies to all offenders regardless of status | Firearm spec not applicable to White |
| Jury instructions on use of deadly force | Garner-based justification required; instructions misled jury | Instructions adequately framed the issue | Instruction potentially misleading; reversible error; Garner-based standard required |
| Need for a mistaken-belief instruction | Mistaken belief could negate knowledge element | No request; forfeiture; plain error not shown | Not plain error; no reversible error on this point |
| Exclusion of testimony about offenses believed by White | Evidence of believed offenses relevant to reasonableness of threat | Evidence prejudicial and unnecessary | Not well taken; error conceded by majority to be non-probative |
Key Cases Cited
- Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (U.S. (1985)) (deadly force permitted where there is probable cause to believe the suspect poses a threat of serious physical harm)
- Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (U.S. (1989)) (Fourth Amendment reasonableness standard for all excessive force claims)
- Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372 (U.S. (2007)) (high-speed chase; reasonable force on scene; not a per se rule)
- Plumhoff v. Rickard, 134 S. Ct. 2012 (S. Ct. (2014)) (deadly force to end grave public safety risk; reasonableness on scene)
- United States v. Ramos, 537 F.3d 439 (5th Cir. (2008)) (police officer liability for unjustified shooting; use of deadly force)
- State v. Taylor, 138 Ohio St.3d 194 (Ohio (2014)) (statutory interpretation; intent of legislature; avoid absurd results)
- State v. Guster, 66 Ohio St.2d 271 (Ohio (1981)) (instructions must address actual issues; knowledge element not at issue here)