State v. UntiedState v. Untied
JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION
JUDGMENT: AFFIRMED
Timothy J. McGinty
Cuyahoga County Prosecutor
BY: Daniel T. Van
Aleksandra Chojnacki
Assistant Prosecuting Attorneys
The Justice Center
1200 Ontario Street
Cleveland, OH 44113
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE
Thomas E. Shaughnessy
11510 Buckeye Road
Cleveland, OH 44104
Amicus Curiae
Robert L. Tobik
Cuyahoga County Public Defender
By: John T. Martin
Assistant Public Defender
Courthouse Square Suite 200
310 Lakeside Avenue
Cleveland, OH 44113
{¶1} Appellant, the state of Ohio, is appealing following the acquittal of defendant David Untied on criminal charges. This court granted leave to appeal based on the state‘s argument that it is not appealing the judgment of acquittal but is seeking a review of the trial court‘s substantive ruling on the issue of venue. See State v. Bistricky, 51 Ohio St.3d 157, 555 N.E.2d 644 (1990), syllabus (” [a] court of appeals has discretionary authority pursuant to
{¶2} On July 18, 2013, Untied was indicted on one count of passing bad checks in violation of
{¶3} The testimony at trial revealed the following. The Canton Charge is a Cleveland Cavaliers minor league basketball team. The Canton Charge is based at the Canton Memorial Civic Center (“Canton MCC“), which is located in Stark County, Ohio. James Hall is a group events specialist for the Canton Charge, and his office is located at the Canton MCC.
{¶5} All of the actions involving this transaction and the services provided occurred in Stark County. The negotiation occurred in Stark County. The checks that Untied provided were made payable to the Canton Charge and were given to Hall at the Canton MCC in Stark County. The checks were deposited in Stark County. The tickets and court time provided were in relation to a Canton Charge game in Stark County.
{¶6} After Hall unsuccessfully attempted to set up payment arrangements with Untied, he contacted chief legal counsel at Cavaliers Holdings, L.L.C., Jason Hillman. Cavaliers Holdings is located in Cleveland, Ohio, and is an umbrella organization of four separate operating entities, including Cavaliers D. League, L.L.C., which owns and operates the Canton Charge. Although the Canton Charge is wholly owned by Cavaliers
{¶7} Cavaliers Holdings provides certain services to its operating entities, such as legal, human resources, accounting, marketing, and communications. Looking above Cavaliers Holdings, there are five different constituent L.L.C.s that have ownership interests in Cavaliers Holdings that operate from various locations in the country.
{¶8} Hillman was not involved with the purchase of the tickets for court time by Untied. He was contacted as legal counsel after the services were provided and the checks were given and refused. Hillman drafted a letter to Untied proposing acceptable terms of payment. Hillman also had a couple of conversations with Untied about making arrangements to pay the balance due. Untied never traveled to Cleveland to meet with Hillman, and no monies were payed on the outstanding balance. Hillman testified that Untied owed “the Canton Charge” for the purchase of the tickets and the access to the court. Hillman also testified that after a settlement for rent is reached with the operator of the Canton MCC venue, monies are paid to Cavaliers Holdings.
{¶9} At the conclusion of the state‘s case, Untied made a Crim.R. 29 motion for acquittal. The trial court granted the motion based on a lack of venue, stating in part that “the requisite nexus between the alleged offense and the county of this trial has not been met in the instant matter.”
{¶10} The state argues on appeal that it presented sufficient evidence to establish venue in Cuyahoga County. The state asserts that Cavaliers Holdings, which is located
{¶11} We are not persuaded by the state‘s arguments.
{¶12} Venue is a fact that must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt in criminal prosecutions unless it is waived by the defendant. State v. Were, 118 Ohio St.3d 448, 2008-Ohio-2762, 890 N.E.2d 263, ¶ 149. When the evidence is insufficient for reasonable minds to find that venue is proper, a motion for judgment of acquittal must be granted. State v. Hampton, 134 Ohio St.3d 447, 2012-Ohio-5688, 983 N.E.2d 324, ¶ 24. “Venue is satisfied where there is a sufficient nexus between the defendant and the county of the trial.” State v. Chintalapalli, 88 Ohio St.3d 43, 45, 2000-Ohio-266, 723 N.E.2d 111.
{¶13}
(A) The trial of a criminal case in this state shall be held in a court having jurisdiction of the subject matter, and in the territory of which the offense or any element of the offense was committed.
* * *
(C) When the offense involved the unlawful taking or receiving of property or the unlawful taking or enticing of another, the offender may be tried in
any jurisdiction from which or into which the property or victim was taken, received, or enticed.
{¶14} Untied was charged with passing bad checks under
(B) No person, with purpose to defraud, shall issue or transfer or cause to be issued or transferred a check or other negotiable instrument, knowing that it will be dishonored * * *.
{¶15}
(A) No person, with purpose to deprive the owner of property or services shall knowingly obtain or exert control over either the property or services in any of the following ways:
* * *
(3) By deception[.]
{¶16} Our review of the record in this case reflects that the elements of the offenses were committed in Stark County. The checks were negotiated, issued and delivered to the Canton Charge in Stark County and were deposited in a bank in Stark County. The checks were provided for tickets to a Canton Charge game in Stark County and were made payable to the Canton Charge. All negotiations involving the purchase of the 300 tickets in exchange for court time before the Canton Charge game occurred in Stark County. The acts of deception used to obtain control over the tickets and court time provided occurred in Stark County. The indictment identified the victim of the offenses as the Canton Charge.
{¶18} We are unable to find that the trial court erred in finding “[t]he requisite nexus between the alleged offense and the county of this trial has not been met in the instant matter.” Venue was not proven by the testimony, facts, and circumstances of this case.
{¶19} Judgment affirmed.
It is ordered that appellee recover from appellant costs herein taxed.
The court finds there were reasonable grounds for this appeal.
It is ordered that a special mandate issue out of this court directing the common pleas court to carry this judgment into execution.
SEAN C. GALLAGHER, PRESIDING JUDGE
KATHLEEN ANN KEOUGH, J., and
EILEEN A. GALLAGHER, J., CONCUR