State v. KnappState v. Knapp
Dated: November 3, 2010
WHITMORE, Judge.
{¶1} Defendant-Appellant, Jason Knapp, appeals from the judgment of the Summit County Court of Common Pleas. This Court affirms.
I
{¶2} On November 28, 2008, Kira M.s three children spent the night at the home of Kira s sister, Mindy Melton, and Melton s husband, Calvin Alexander IV. Melton and Alexander had eighteen people, eight of whom were under the age of thirteen, in their home at various points that night. Three individuals of particular interest were Kevin Miller, Nick Korach, and Knapp. Knapp had been staying with Melton and Alexander for about two years and had his own bedroom on the second floor. Miller, a friend of Melton and Alexander, sometimes stayed in Knapp s room and did so on the night in question. Korach, a neighbor from down the street, helped Alexander and Knapp deliver newspapers for the Akron Beacon Journal and frequently visited the house, which consisted of two floors and an attic. Most of the children
{¶3} Kira s youngest daughter, A.M., was two years old when she spent the night at Melton and Alexander s house. Kira and Melton checked A.M. and the other sleeping children sometime between 11:00 p.m. and 12:00 a.m. Kira then left the house for the night and returned the next morning. When Kira changed A.M. s diaper the next morning, she discovered a large amount of blood and extensive injuries to A.M. s genitals. Kira immediately took A.M. to the emergency room where doctors had to repair lacerations and muscular tears, extending from A.M. s hymenal tissue “through the perineal body to less than three centimeters from the anus.” Doctors also noted bruising on the right side of A.M. s head, surrounded by a ten-centimeter area of hair loss.
{¶4} Kira and Melton phoned the police after taking A.M. to the hospital. Melton and others suspected that Knapp was responsible for A.M. s injuries because, among other things, he had spent time alone on the second floor of the house that night while most of the other adults were on the first floor. The police later found a blood-soaked sheet in Knapp s bedroom closet and obtained a confession from Knapp.
{¶5} On December 12, 2008, a grand jury indicted Knapp on the following counts: (1) rape, in violation of
{¶6} Knapp now appeals from his convictions and raises two assignments of error for our review.
II
Assignment of Error Number One
“APPELLANT S CONFESSION WAS MADE INVOLUNTARY (sic) AND APPELLANT S RIGHTS AS PROTECTED BY ARTICLE I, SECTION 10 OF THE OHIO CONSTITUTION AND FIFTH AMENDMENT OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION WERE VIOLATED.”
{¶7} In his first assignment of error, Knapp argues that the police violated his due process rights by extracting an involuntary confession from him.
{¶8} Initially, we note that Knapp has not framed his first assignment of error or the argument contained therein in terms of a redressable error. “The purpose of an assignment of error is to focus the attention of an appellate court upon a potential error that occurred at the trial level.” State v. Brown, 9th Dist. No. 25077, 2010-Ohio-4453, at ¶9. While this Court addresses arguments that pertain to alleged deprivations of a person s substantive rights, it does so within
{¶9} The Ohio Supreme Court has held that:
“Appellate review of a motion to suppress presents a mixed question of law and fact. When considering a motion to suppress, the trial court assumes the role of trier of fact and is therefore in the best position to resolve factual questions and evaluate the credibility of witnesses. State v. Mills (1992), 62 Ohio St.3d 357, 366. Consequently, an appellate court must accept the trial court s findings of fact if they are supported by competent, credible evidence. State v. Fanning (1982), 1 Ohio St.3d 19. Accepting these facts as true, the appellate court must then independently determine, without deference to the conclusion of the trial court, whether the facts satisfy the applicable legal standard. State v. McNamara (1997), 124 Ohio App.3d 706.” State v. Burnside, 100 Ohio St.3d 152, 2003-Ohio-5372, at ¶8.
{¶10} Knapp filed a motion to suppress his oral statements on the basis that they were coerced and taken in the absence of a valid waiver of his Miranda rights. The trial court held a hearing on Knapp s motion. On June 29, 2009, the court issued a journal entry. The entry provides that “[f]or the reasons stated on the record [at the suppression hearing], the Court denies the motion.” Knapp did not request a transcript of the suppression hearing, so it is not a part of the record on appeal. “When portions of the transcript which are necessary to resolve assignments of error are not included in the record on appeal, the reviewing court has no choice but to presume the validity of the [trial] court s proceedings, and affirm.” Cuyahoga Falls v. James, 9th Dist. No. 21119, 2003-Ohio-531, at ¶9, quoting Knapp v. Edwards Laboratories (1980), 61 Ohio St.2d 197, 199. “Because the transcript of the suppression hearing is necessary for a determination of [Knapp s first] assignment of error, this Court must presume regularity in the trial court s proceedings and affirm the judgment of the trial court.” State v. Price, 9th Dist. No. 07CA0003-M, 2008-Ohio-2252, at ¶53. Knapp s first assignment of error is overruled.
Assignment of Error Number Two
“THE VERDICTS IN THIS CASE WERE BASED ON INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE AND WERE AGAINST THE MANIFEST WEIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE AND AS A RESULT, APPELLANT S RIGHTS AS PROTECTED BY ARTICLE I, SECTION 16 OF THE OHIO CONSTITUTION AND FIFTH AMENDMENT OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION WERE VIOLATED.”
{¶11} In his second assignment of error, Knapp argues that his convictions are based on insufficient evidence and against the manifest weight of the evidence. We address each argument separately.
{¶12} In order to determine whether the evidence before the trial court was sufficient to sustain a conviction, this Court must review the evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution. State v. Jenks (1991), 61 Ohio St.3d 259, 274. Furthermore:
“An appellate court s function when reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence to support a criminal conviction is to examine the evidence admitted at trial to determine whether such evidence, if believed, would convince the average mind of the defendant s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The relevant inquiry is whether, after viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime proven beyond a reasonable doubt.” Id. at paragraph two of the syllabus; see, also, State v. Thompkins (1997), 78 Ohio St.3d 380, 386.
“In essence, sufficiency is a test of adequacy.” Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d at 386.
{¶13}
{¶14}
“No person, *** in the case of a victim under the age of thirteen ***, by any means, shall remove another from the place where the other person is found or restrain the liberty of the other person *** [t]o engage in sexual activity *** with the victim against the victim s will[.]”
“Sexual activity” includes sexual conduct, as defined above.
{¶16} Finally,
{¶17} A.M. was two years old when she was sexually assaulted and sustained grievous injuries. Dr. Maria Ramundo examined A.M. at the emergency room. Dr. Ramundo testified that A.M. was bruised on the right side of her head and had a ten-centimeter area of her scalp exposed due to hair loss. A.M. also had lacerations from her hymen “through the perineal body to less than three centimeters from the anus.” Dr. Richard Steiner, a pediatrician and expert in the area of child abuse, specified that A.M. had tears in the muscular tissue of her pelvic floor and anal canal. A.M. s injuries were so extensive that she had to undergo surgery to have them repaired. According to Dr. Steiner, A.M. s injuries were the result of blunt force penetrating trauma and could have stemmed from any blunt object, including a finger. Dr. Steiner estimated that A.M. sustained the foregoing injuries less than eighteen hours before her examination at the hospital. A.M. s examination began at approximately 12:46 p.m. on November 29, 2008.
{¶18} Kira and Melton both testified that A.M. was sleeping soundly along with several other children in an upstairs bedroom when they checked on her between 11:00 p.m. and 12:00 a.m. on the night of November 28, 2008. Kira then left for the night and did not discover A.M. s
{¶19} Alexander, Melton, and Miller all testified that they were either playing or watching a videogame on the first floor of the house between 12:00 a.m. and 1:30 a.m. on the morning of November 29, 2008. Melton and Alexander s youngest son was with them and fell asleep on Miller. Knapp, however, was not with the group on the first floor. Alexander testified that Knapp went upstairs sometime after 12:00 a.m. and played his radio loudly. Both Melton and Alexander testified that, at some point, Knapp came back downstairs for a diaper, indicating that A.M. needed one. Additionally, Miller testified that he saw Knapp with A.M. when he carried Melton and Alexander s son upstairs to put him to bed. According to Miller, he saw Knapp pulling A.M. by the hand, leading her from Knapp s bedroom back across the hallway to the bedroom where the children were sleeping. Miller followed Knapp into the children s room. Miller observed that he startled Knapp when he entered the room and that Knapp left quickly. He further observed that A.M. was awake in the bed and “teary-eyed.” Miller testified that he returned to the first floor and Korach arrived less than fifteen minutes later. Shortly before Korach arrived, Melton, Alexander, and Miller all heard someone turn on the shower upstairs.
{¶20} When Korach arrived, he went upstairs to the second floor to find Knapp so that they could start their newspaper delivery route. Korach observed that the second floor had a strong chemical smell that he associated with bleach. Korach testified that he looked for Knapp in the second-floor bathroom because the water was running, but found the bathroom empty. He proceeded down the hall to Knapp s bedroom, but instead found Knapp on his knees in the
{¶21} The police conducted a search of Melton and Alexander s house the next morning, after Kira discovered A.M. s injuries. The police found a bloody bed sheet in Knapp s closet, which Melton later identified as Knapp s bed sheet. The police also discovered areas on the second floor that had been bleached, including an area on the floor in the children s room. Knapp later confessed to sexually assaulting A.M. with his finger. Specifically, he admitted to doing so when the police questioned him on November 29, 2008. He also admitted to sexually assaulting A.M. when the police spoke to him a few days later and when he called his mother from jail the week of his trial. Accordingly, a rational trier of fact could have found that Knapp was the individual who victimized A.M.
{¶22} Based on all of the foregoing, there was sufficient evidence to support each of Knapp s convictions. Knapp s argument that his convictions are based on insufficient evidence lacks merit.
Manifest Weight
{¶23} In determining whether a conviction is against the manifest weight of the evidence an appellate court:
“[M]ust review the entire record, weigh the evidence and all reasonable inferences, consider the credibility of witnesses and determine whether, in resolving conflicts in the evidence, the trier of fact clearly lost its way and created such a manifest miscarriage of justice that the conviction must be reversed and a new trial ordered.” State v. Otten (1986), 33 Ohio App.3d 339, 340.
A weight of the evidence challenge indicates that a greater amount of credible evidence supports one side of the issue than supports the other. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d at 387. Further, when
{¶24} Knapp argues that his convictions are against the manifest weight of the evidence because no one testified that they ever heard A.M. screaming in pain, there was no DNA evidence implicating Knapp, and someone else in the home could have committed these crimes. We disagree that Knapp s convictions are against the manifest weight of the evidence.
{¶25} The fact that no one ever heard A.M. screaming in pain is largely irrelevant, as A.M. irrefutably incurred serious injuries and the evidence supports the conclusion that she sustained them at some point after Kira left her at Melton and Alexander s house. Even disregarding that fact, however, several witnesses stated that there was a significant amount of noise in Melton and Alexander s home in the hours between 12:00 a.m. and 2:00 a.m. In particular, there was a television playing in the children s room, a radio and television playing in Knapp s room, and a television playing on the first floor. Melton herself admitted that she would not have been able to hear one of the children if they cried. The jury could have chosen to believe that the large amount of noise in the home masked any cries A.M. might have emitted. Further, the jury could have determined that the head wound A.M. received factored into her ability to cry out at all.
{¶26} As to the lack of DNA evidence implicating Knapp, Stacy Violi, a forensic scientist from the Ohio Bureau of Criminal Identification and Investigation, confirmed that she
{¶27} Finally, there were numerous pieces of evidence to support the conclusion that Knapp was the individual who sexually assaulted A.M. Although there were many individuals in Melton and Alexander s home, Knapp had the opportunity to be alone with A.M. between 12:00 a.m. and 2:00 a.m. when Melton, Alexander, and Miller were on the first floor. Knapp specifically came downstairs to get a diaper for A.M. during that period of time. Not long after, Miller saw Knapp leading A.M. back to the children s bedroom and noted that Knapp seemed startled when he realized Miller was there. Korach also saw Knapp in the children s room when he arrived ten to fifteen minutes later. Further, both Alexander and Korach noted that Knapp acted oddly on their newspaper delivery route. Alexander observed Knapp crying and testified that it took Knapp longer than usual to complete his deliveries. Alexander also testified that, shortly before the police arrived that day, he confronted Knapp and accused him of raping A.M. According to Alexander, Knapp acted calmly the entire time he was being accused of rape. Detective Rex Lott, who questioned Knapp later that same day, also observed that Knapp acted calmly. Detective Lott testified that it is unusual for an innocent person to maintain a calm demeanor when faced with such a serious accusation.
{¶29} Based on all of the foregoing, we cannot conclude that the jury erred in convicting Knapp. While much of the evidence in this case was circumstantial in nature, it nonetheless supported the conclusion that Knapp sexually assaulted A.M. See State v. Smith (Nov. 8, 2000), 9th Dist. No. 99CA007399, at *15 (“Circumstantial evidence and direct evidence inherently possess the same probative value.“), quoting Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d at paragraph one of the syllabus. Further, Knapp admitted on more than one occasion that he perpetrated these crimes. Knapp s argument that his convictions are against the manifest weight of the evidence lacks merit. Knapp s second assignment of error is overruled.
III
{¶30} Knapp s assignments of error are overruled. The judgment of the Summit County Court of Common Pleas is affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
We order that a special mandate issue out of this Court, directing the Court of Common Pleas, County of Summit, State of Ohio, to carry this judgment into execution. A certified copy of this journal entry shall constitute the mandate, pursuant to App.R. 27.
Immediately upon the filing hereof, this document shall constitute the journal entry of judgment, and it shall be file stamped by the Clerk of the Court of Appeals at which time the period for review shall begin to run. App.R. 22(E). The Clerk of the Court of Appeals is instructed to mail a notice of entry of this judgment to the parties and to make a notation of the mailing in the docket, pursuant to App.R. 30.
Costs taxed to Appellant.
BETH WHITMORE FOR THE COURT
MOORE, J.
BELFANCE, P. J.
CONCUR
APPEARANCES:
CHRISTOPHER R. SNYDER, Attorney at Law, for Appellant.
SHERRI BEVAN WALSH, Prosecuting Attorney, and HEAVEN R. DIMARTINO, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for Appellee.