State v. Wingfield
11 N.E.3d 732
Ohio Ct. App.2014Background
- Indictment for carrying a concealed weapon, having weapons while under disability, and tampering with evidence; one-year firearm specification attached.
- Trial separately tried the weapon-under-disability count to the bench; other counts tried to jury, resulting in acquittals for concealed weapon and tampering with evidence.
- Gun found in store after chase; owner testified gun did not belong to him; no fingerprints on gun; no eyewitness placing Wingfield in possession.
- Wingfield admitted possessing marijuana; officers did not observe Wingfield with the gun; area where gun found was publicly accessible, with heavy store traffic.
- Conviction: having weapons while under disability; sentence: two years; appellate court reversed, sentence vacated, and Wingfield discharged; majority concluded insufficient evidence of possession; dissenting views discussed post-release control and costs issues.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence to prove possession | State argued Wingfield constructively possessed gun | Wingfield contends no dominion and control shown | Conviction reversed; insufficient evidence established. |
| Manifest weight of the evidence | State contends evidence supported conviction | Wingfield asserts weight favors conviction | Moot after reversal on sufficiency; not sustained. |
| Court costs imposed without in-court notice | State that costs were properly imposed | Wingfield argues improper imposition without notice | Remand advisable to delete court costs (majority did not adopt; dissent would remedy). |
| Post-release control informing and duration | State contends mandatory 3-year term | Wingfield asserts discretionary postrelease control | Remand for discretionary postrelease control under R.C. 2967.28(C); proper remedy is to impose discretionary period. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Bridgeman, 55 Ohio St.2d 261 (Ohio 1978) (sufficiency review and standard under Jackson v. Virginia)
- State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (Ohio 1991) (sufficiency framework, paragraph two syllabus)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (conviction must be supported by evidence viewed in light most favorable to prosecution)
- State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (Ohio 1997) (clarifies sufficiency and evidence standard)
- State v. Morris, 2011-Ohio-824 (Ohio 2011) (verdicts on separate counts not required to be consistent; not to speculate on reasons)
- State v. Trewartha, 165 Ohio App.3d.91 (Ohio 2005) (inconsistency of verdicts not to be speculated upon in sufficiency analysis)
- State v. McGhee, 2011-Ohio-619 (Ohio 2011) (postrelease control discretionary, not mandatory; notice required)
- State v. Freeman, 2014-Ohio-1732 (Ohio 2014) (remand for discretionary postrelease control under 2967.28(C))
- State v. Shaffer, 2011-Ohio-844 (Ohio 2011) (remand not to impose costs without proper sentencing entry)