State v. Williams, 2015 Ohio 172

Evontae Williams, age 17, was convicted of murder and felonious assault after a jury trial in the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas.
Williams faced two counts of murder and two counts of felonious assault, with firearm specifications, arising from the March 24, 2013 killing of Kortez McRae at a party on East 66th Street.
Key trial testimony linked Williams to the shooting: a witness saw Williams flee with a gun, another identified Williams by his clothes, and a witness testified Williams was the shooter; an in-court identification was also admitted.
The state presented eyewitnesses, circumstantial evidence, and an autopsy showing a fatal head wound; the defense presented no witnesses.
On appeal, Williams challenged hearsay and identification, the flight instruction, the opportunity to present witnesses, sufficiency of the evidence, and the weight of the evidence; all assignments were overruled and the conviction affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Admission of hearsay and in-court identification	State contends excited utterance admissible; Dalleo’s in-court ID proper.	Hearsay lacking proper exception; in-court ID unreliable and improperly admitted.	Hearsay excused as excited utterance; no reversible error in ID
Flight instruction	Flight evidence warranted as consciousness of guilt.	Instruction was unwarranted given the record.	No abuse; instruction properly supported by evidence
Opportunity to present defense witnesses and renew Crim.R. 29	Defense was afforded chance to present or renew after ruling.	Trial court deprived him of opportunity to present defense.	No error; court asked about defense witnesses and Williams declined
Sufficiency of the evidence	Evidence, including Mario’s trial testimony and corroboration, supports conviction.	Evidence insufficient to sustain murder verdict.	Sufficient evidence; reasonable juror could find elements beyond reasonable doubt
Manifest weight of the evidence	Evidence credibility supported conviction; no miscarriage of justice.	Weight of the evidence favors acquittal due to inconsistencies.	Not against the weight of the evidence; not a manifest miscarriage of justice

State v. Sage, 31 Ohio St.3d 173 (1987) (evidentiary abuse of discretion standard)
Potter v. Baker, 162 Ohio St. 488 (1955) (excited utterance four-part test)
State v. Taylor, 66 Ohio St.3d 295 (1993) (excited utterance requirements)
State v. Martin, 19 Ohio St.3d 122 (1985) (abuse of discretion standard; evidence ruling)
Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (1997) (definition and application of weight of the evidence)
State v. DeHass, 10 Ohio St.2d 230 (1967) (credibility and weighing witnesses are jury questions)