FIRST DISTRICT
COURT OF APPEALS
THESE SUMMARIES ARE NEITHER APPROVED IN ADVANCE NOR ENDORSED BY THE COURT. THEY ARE NOT HEADNOTES OR SYLLABI. INTERESTED PARTIES SHOULD OBTAIN COPIES OF THE ACTUAL DECISIONS FROM THE CLERK OF THE COURT OF APPEALS.
DATE: Wednesday, December 18, 2024
CAPTION: STATE V. WHYTE
APPEAL NO.: C-240096
TRIAL NOS.: B-2203081-A
KEY WORDS: EVIDENCE – SUFFICIENCY – MANIFEST WEIGHT – MURDER – INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL
Defendant’s conviction for murder was supported by sufficient evidence and not against the weight of the evidence where the evidence established that defendant was driven to the crime scene, minutes after defendant left the vehicle, the driver heard multiple gunshots, defendant called the driver to pick him up directly after the shooting, defendant threw the gun out of the window after fleeing the scene, and defendant’s cell phone established that he was near the scene when the shooting occurred, and the factfinder found the witnesses’ testimony to be credible.
Trial counsel did not provide ineffective assistance of counsel by failing to call an expert in crime scene reconstruction because any testimony that a crime scene reconstructionist would have provided was purely speculative.
JUDGMENT: AFFIRMED
JUDGES: OPINION by ZAYAS, J.; BOCK, P.J., and KINSLEY, J., CONCUR.
CAPTION: HO V. CO
APPEAL NO.: C-240141
TRIAL NO.: DR-2001507
KEY WORDS: VEXATIOUS LITIGATOR — JURISDICTION — SERVICE — APPELLATE REVIEW – CONTEMPT — PURGE – ATTORNEY FEES – PARENTING TIME – PURGE CONDITION – BEST INTEREST FACTORS
SUMMARY: The domestic relations court had jurisdiction to decide plaintiff wife’s motion on expanded parenting time after her designation as a vexatious litigator where wife had filed her motion before her designation.
Even if the domestic relations court’s entry had not been served on plaintiff, the entry would not be void.
Where the record does not disclose a proper statutory or other basis for an award of attorney’s fees, the award must be reversed.
Where the contemnor voluntarily purged the contempt, the appeal from that contempt order is rendered moot.
Where the trial court considered the appropriate factors concerning the child’s best interest, the court acted within its discretion in rejecting plaintiff wife’s request for expanded parenting time.
JUDGMENT: AFFIRMED IN PART AND REVERSED IN PART
JUDGES: OPINION by BERGERON, J.; ZAYAS, P.J., and WINKLER, J., CONCUR.
CAPTION: STATE V. JONES
APPEAL NOS.: C-240155, C-240156
TRIAL NO.: 23/CRB/10524
KEY WORDS: ASSAULT — CRIM.R. 33 — MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL — INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE — MANIFEST WEIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE
SUMMARY: The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant’s Crim.R. 33(A) motion for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence where the allegedly newly discovered evidence could have been discovered prior to trial with due diligence and did not disclose a strong probability that it would change the result if a new trial was granted.
Where there was not a reasonable probability that the outcome of the proceedings would have been different but for defense counsel’s failure to introduce evidence corroborating defendant’s alibi, defendant did not receive ineffective assistance of counsel.
Where the trial court was in the best position to judge the credibility of the witnesses, it was entitled to believe the testimony offered by the victim of the offense and to reject the conflicting testimony offered by defendant’s witnesses as not credible, and the court did not lose its way and create a manifest miscarriage of justice in convicting defendant of assault.
JUDGMENTS: AFFIRMED
JUDGES: OPINION by CROUSE, J.; BOCK, P.J., and WINKLER, J., CONCUR.