recedved - sconet.state.oh.us r°ram !.--d -irv viql ... on p€erch 22, 2010, the matter was called...

IN THE 5^^ÊN^ COURT OF OHIO

S7AT^ OF OHIO,

Plairtt.z ff-Pp '.lee,

iP%

[,4 " from the Luc

j ° ' .... . '. ^: w ... ^#"^" ^î ^,' ^.,^

E y u l"r.t i e ,. t

Tr, ou:^^t Wo.0020r 12310

Dejunn Sonker,ident-Appellentw, . C.A. 7777 ;,;o. Lw-^^ 1140

ME^^ÔW{]aUM IN SUPPORT Or JURISDICTION

OF APPELLANT ÊJ1#AN BOOKER

Da ,j u i u , ^,: ,! 628-^ 9C c,

L'. , i : c- i.ctlon=a l r ' r8

2075 South Avon-t ald r

Graftonq Ghim, 44044

Jx,?!vp Is ML :idW:r

Cf't'»il. ti'o1^^ ^^ 700 AI:iam" Street

i : l' ;, shiCB, 43624

419...2'1 3-2011

Counsel for Appellee,

RECEDVEDFEH 2 5 2013

CLERK OF COURTSUPREPJE CC1 U R'i OF OHIO

GGERh OF COURTSi1PREME CO1;P' ^^ OP-IO

OF WHY THIS CASE IS A CASE OF PUBLIC

OR GP"_'AT GENERAL INTEREST AND a ^ÔLVES A SUBSTANTIAL C 17I^?`. TU7'IQÂL

QUESTION ..............................» ...................................,¢.....».. 1

STATEMENT OF THE CASE AND FACTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . „ . . . . d. . . . . . . . . . 2

^ ;, .. . i t r^ s f ws: + I : T HE T^:^^L C^ tê1T ERRED WITH ITS ^^' v'r' INST#^t^CT106`,J> [^^^^ R^ IT

, .. . E,:^ ^00t..Ei'i t5 GG^^ÎCT! D^`!U' FO' F6_^ ^^..^.'° ^.^,^^î..^4 OF TP4 ^^DERATI^^J

07 3`r^ÛIS PFOLT-±UAT.T^N " TE ITS rtEL^^PRnTIO^.^^ ÊCARe'T:+jt= THE tl^^^R LVTFE[,.Q"'°I-'u-5

ASSAULT A,L! E"A3"110N ..........................<,.3....»..Y.Y.R....#.M.s...MS.P......®... 12

fxcrµ i.tirs^^^ âw4.,Èa,TT: THE TRIAL CClt1RT ERF?7£3 IN DENYING t-11TTCi^ FOR

A,aQUIT1C'AL WHERE THE STATE FAILED TO FRr ^-ENT SU`^ F-rCIENT EUI'Dr ' 7- TO SunÎN A C,' }17^-,TIDN

a # . . w Y . . . . . . k s . . . . . .s . i . . A s . P r 6 . . < b ® & s . . . i M r Es e. . Y e s H . . . s b . . . . . . . * . W k R # M & . a . ne . . R 4 . . . Y 3 a . 15

Propc^,ita.r^ of Lew MR.BOOKER°S CONVICTION FOR FELONY MURDER AND THE ATTENDANT

Fl,REARM SPECS;FICATION YAS AGAINST THE MANIFEST WEIGHT OF THE Etl.^ÊNCE . . . . , . . . .. . . . , . . 17

CP11'uCLd..^SIDN . . . . . . . . . . . : . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . m . . . . . . . . . . m . . . ,» . . . . . . . . . . . , . . '1 ^

CERTIFICATE OF ^^RVICE ....e....Q............H.®.................... .»......9.......,... 20

APPf:.M"fTX

Decision and Judgment

of the Sixth Appe11ant, District

Lucas County (Jan. 11, 2013) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . w , . .. . . . . . . . . I

EXPLANATION OF Q=;1H11 THIS CASE IS A CASE OF

PaSELIC UR t=RÂT GENERAL INTEREST AND

INtlDLVES A SUBSTANTIAL CONSTITUTIGINAL QUESTION

0 fa.;k;^° is ot^t t^ f public i;3a." j' r. b 1.:%'Y ^Î. C. e'YC"

1 ^ Dejuan BC3€^1^:'e1' g g^qi ! ;q a S/'J,c°G.:Im1'C C.l t ^' k,'hP^) ^" yd ;1 t ^ ^ ^ f k ..!' .^

gG."sn awa^.f f ,!"'kryy ,1;"Sw3 C»°I+• hi4z! thLLem a'{taCk;":::Cs« t;î'tCh ^h^ka ol .,fv:' v rwP^ f lF^l-1 to

t;a' f""k tt't i!;:° rt 1in "k» hi,,.." !°"

t ^ r a ^ f^^, ^ cl11r , ^€.^"iu 1 t^^!:^ ,^2nC' .^l Pt R. l! r^tbb ^^ :., C'.t^'1 i 1 3k4!u'"tyu,î 1.^^^^, ^ Iu•^' ^^

frc ^him rind . hC.'. , ,d } G llad hiY1'i wz ^.Nu^., !r"ef IF, r }c?} a I?•.f{ ` r 'nd not an 1gal'": q

;`.. I d ( ! ^ I..- jx: Ef a l, .^ ty^' of .'!,rr;:^ l k;w^. v i:°.iwâ `^ o^.:1 ^°J ^;^ ^': 1^

1hd 7 find;:4ng f:'e:,Jwyw°'S a sE1^» ^^ ^' ;^r.'to t it" ^ 9wF ^11i1^' 7t",'zrh

.i''` ' 1st:..:+ I^f^^ R^ i P 'r":'&'sh"ti°^ .^t! ^ t. Ch'r l lid rl "•

. € s m . 'v' t` ° t !:^ I _ r .. ^' ^ k,^:.'î ^°. '^^.... ' !'" '. ;. ' g ' .. I I. '' I , ... t^` `' ! . ^ . ^:.^! .. ! ..: ^' .. . . .,.

h Ckfi or v,:l cl!^ t a jL.Go' :411aunt 9' f

in Cn9rder 11::f'7 dt;7f c,°.t1L, 1'1itr or r"'!r ,aa I f. ri!i:J A"er :.i„f i s t:io ntv o9:..^^ of f! e;k:" iir

ak'•"i:gi!yTy

aE! L? ^1 :!:'^ t'. ?3a Sot7er, ^ iit^:,

i6'"ftCwt `G'.h! ^R 7 4 iPlUw' th':;r,. 'it'n'n i. tJ h.!„•;a r

A7 , ^t ^ .^ : ;°"t '^• c"`^^„f", ^ .; L W ,. C. h i t ^'1 r^ ^.: r^"1 ^"1.Y. 4, ^»J i` ^! ^'k e:"1 w , 7. cI"k: ." ^.,e :

c!" t^^pa::w ^!"? .,Câ l.„C .K3.,,Ca:,:littt hr< dF'T;=,$1rJi,is:.C r1k,^d,Jelf Erli TÎ ^.°., a1yaîCl ,, ^"khkwF;t ^t ^1y . ttt!" ^ 1` k!t4:`t^

1. t l'U f'o tili,. I xh^ ^^.„r I?e wl n"id I i.Cîry ;,

^.."ha c k t h^ r ^ . -wicauld k°raft 1 '!' ^^„^^^rh.>^•1^:.^r^ for imal° 4r ^r ha,.,r

;i wIt j 'C%.^; î ^; 8! a^.' ^'^l;.l1"I d7r.;l„"^!t. ^:alf:! f^7^" t 1^3I !l Wî 3;!lx,^.^W f;lwa Pr1^.tGk-'i l >

u"r"Iii!ari a g t w Rthi ^ MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF JURISDICTION, :^ a^,sr^ ^^î !.^ ^^ k'^:,, i^^' P^'^! IC

OR GREAT ^r-NEFÂL INTEREST AND INVOLVES A SUBSTANTIAL CONSTITUTIONAL ^^^STÔN, theref rrre

t» ai"`; m;;Ju7"t' shoU.l?'" J9.^^ 1",Sol7„Ct?.:.tJt"t of t1is G ase.^+.

1

I. STATEMENT OF THE CASE

On July 7^ 2011, Appellant, f.)e,juert Bcakrr, was indicted on one count of Murder, in

vialett,on of RXa 2903,02(8) anci 2929.02, an unspecified felony, with an acc€irrapariying

firer k _ nlfa..cation, in violation of R.i m 2941 .'{45 and nrie count of carrying a

r°ram !.--d -irv viql^tian of RdGN 2923,12{A}(2) and (F), a felony of th1s, fourth

clogr

On July 15„ 2009, Mr. Hooker appeared before the trial cr urt and upon his :reqeês+«

the matter was anni a,nued for the appmerencr:^ of retained c. ,1,. On July 24, 20€19, Mr.

BrJ+okeY appeared with :^^âined counsel for arraignment, anta i^g, p1rzY^s of "not guiltyar

to all charges.

On P€erch 22, 2010, the matter was called for. jury tr:s.al, The trial cont:r.nuad ar-s

C t^rr^h 23, 2010, March 24, 2010, March 25„ 21.;1 0, and March 26, 2010, On Merch 26, 2010,

jury re^:.^^hF-,d .ryt^:^ verdict, finding Mr. ôokeru guilty of one cr;aunt, tof murder, in

violat:won of R^V 29413,02(B} and 2929..02, en unspecified fp-lonyx ^.ind the attached

firearms specification, ,*.rE of R.G. 2941 .145„ The jLj,ry fuj-ir-^ Mr. Booker not

guilty of CaP"rying a Co' C :, l, V wi^sponf in violation of R.C. 2927,a1u(A)(2) and (}° ), a

felony cif the fourth r r .y4W T"rr trial crir W^t he.^âfter refr; r _ d 'the, meai°ter for a

pt^°ementet°^ce report and sr^t tha r ,.., êr for scrourv,cinga

On April 22, 2010, Mr. Elroi<er appeared fowµ sentencm.ngg The trial caurt sentenced

Mr. Booker for a term of 19 years to life as to the conviction for murder and a term of

3 years for the firearms specification, for a total term of imprisonment of 18 yea.rs af

life in prison.

On Mey 18fi 2010; Mr. Backor filed his ns^^tica of appeal.

II. STATEMENT OF FACTS

On May 1, 2009, around midnQhtp near tha intersection iif Merce.,r St,^êt, and

Williams+rille in Toledo, Lucas County, appellant, C1ejuer€ Hooker, shot and killed r"krrnon,^,

Parker and shot Markees Turrrr,^r, shortly after Mr. Turner had rokaber^ f4:^ . Booke.r r

gunpoint and pY.s+al bahipped "1r a Booker durinr, an aborted rre-irijuarrs sale betwasn Mr.

Booker arid the cor^panicin of the two victims, Kevin Garrett. This a;x.l occurred ira or

around a white Ford Aernstc9S' van operated by Mr. Booker.

The principles in he incident rêre ;a appellant, Dejuen Booker, Kevin Garrett,

Mar4er:,p^s Turner, and Armand Parker.

Mr. Bo.rekwr testified ^ê-t he was 22 years old and had kêen laid off from îss

,px,ovment for ar^.h„arraxirraately two months prio:r to the incident. Trial tr;^^scra.,p*,, volumie

2 (TT2) at 192, 195. He fUx•t3^^^r teStif i.,d °thart hr! w^âs, a dealer in marijuans „ 1'T2 at:

202--204, N,w:c testif.i.eci that at the time of the incident, th^.^t he had been dealing for

2

thre"" days. TO-1 transeri.pt, volume 3 (Tt',^) at 61.. No 1-i .re 1. ;.r N

a^r "".£i^^;^Gp. .. !t r p .}_ ° ; , a! Cy;.^t^f"^. ^ ^ which w.'iS th subject iTs .

ir ,_ he w4ar'-, 27 ,,'r. ., 11. T"«'3 a!' '918,. f1r. Turner 'rurIbher

: l'^, : ^'r4^csr" and andv he 1 . ._ .°i is . YU^

7. .:. `r polirM.e ,n ; r r r:, , -, :i ,r Ap.ril 16, EO: TT'3 a't

^ I,II ". ,' I ? a;'^:;153.•.4. He ta""r^` ^ftEÎ ,-i ^1 I;I_.. :' -'Y" i„klµ4 37]'.'.»,,1'^' ^: '^ ^;a i^;d '^C'7^^^3û r '^., ,..^

f, u Le part in '«w:{ e h;.-.,,: 1, 200m :^^^cident. T1"3 of 11^'^, 121M A fr.arther °«;s ,, =

l^qh I r I f : i 0 a^ ad a "ri- c _ 9 _ N UlnO a ' . G I i i F to thB cl . . ,,'

rY sjlii ' I ^.(n i i^;, t _ ; ^„t„ i1 Mi`.Y be C.° iwbnos,^ at se "^ . ., -;r^.gun _, ,

TO n t W- 3:. h`«^.^ fu4 Af. n I Ì i i `r _ . .y r`.. ?f Ti: p lan °a,.,€:, y t f: fy

in F « r . Bo^.--tkerrs tr .[ 1 v h . s l't 157, H: Aim ! 10 i was _ b.e

;senterrCed r^n the next Friday and thv^ the was facing a r,axf i.am of '{ . a rn jell. T7'3

"i 2Y,

Mr. Gar. e'4;; , ' J i ;hat M*" m Parker was o fr$.ar`.'r w I h ' livaC w" hiu 5 :1,Y.o- ter by

whom hr;n had two w .lic', r., . TT2 at 130

T°hs chrunalE,agy of t ine day 3 .! i °^g up to the t_ q; m ,rl , , as establs IrF,.r"I by tN

a,^y and evidenr^ :^ r Is as R71 . . C;ar }cr•~.^^^s Turner n _.f. "^:^ that Rp,: 1 0 EGi ,_

ho had opent the night with two -03.,frienr^::3; at the E;lmd^:^lu Court A p.Po. ... . urt E.E.mda:`.k:

,: .r7 Tas ddr , Q_.l- y waking up r.wi : 1p ...DE3°_°W at approximately #"Ruon. TT«.r €w L 123,. 4. F«e

I f.. . , C I A afte'. W t 'a l; I..1f 1 f he went to his a'e^^â idenCre^ ch 1"rp . ;lB:d r ":' l t; to

t Elcdn li. CoJJ ,. A "ip^."oXifTPately 4"00 p.3ir, y whi.rn he ,.:i .1 his Lx}i'7fk'iaC"nk ",.

"4paf"ti,k . u driI'i w'`Ct 1 ' Yt n ' .'1k.Lng CCtv:1d,"ijuana. TT3 at 124-.•5.

{,io:i„1`€r:idlw7l'^tly:;; during the iLy of May 1, 2009y Kevin Garrett k.tl4:to with hls sister and

h.: f.}.iend r.J!fi1:r 0 r bC1yfr).end. PT ^ Parker, at 11,.,, ?," "'portment in th^'? ElCll«.«elif° I,@"3urt;

.^^*^ ^ ) ^"' ''^";# ,^'^ ^ ... p ¢^^p, 'J! I' ^^"ââ« n 1 1 y 1 6 » ^ . ^'' . '7 ,. .e ^ .i:^f, . . .. ^ ^'^ ^^7^"^ .J^.!^^,J^^ , ^.^ tu'^°.a.R.^:^ ,^.. n i"^r.:r e ..""'n' ..

}E ... :.aistert i k' ...I only i7 him ""r7'^.^.^+ T: "l7m...'lf were dr:, i , i'; f:'ss

-a:...a..n.^,rC'^ Lw^rr'4.^3^::^:T'r 17@ "^4,^^:l4".^„ TT:'^ ^,i'^,^ "^Wài^-^.±. y 2 01 ,

Later during the L.êy; M'p". Ga,^.:retv,. and Mr. Parker teaok ti:i l.t6E7lk arr;3S.ir1d the apartment

complex and encountered Mr, Turner in a park connected to the cou^plex. TT2 at ^ 98; TT3

at 125, Mr. Turner recalled it was dark when the arc ,.nt4;, r raccu;, rei.f , T'Ta at 1 27 . ,0r

Mr: WW a1"3d M:t^,.: TLK.I.'n' . fied thm'' they her . smar"d other in tiÌe;N... ^.,."hi" ,, 'i('t_;,

but ha n oa„^ âc1-r a^he same time before that ev!=tning: TT2 at 198; TT3 at 10-5,

Both !:estifierywi tha^^^ Mr w Parkr•;..ru did not know Mr. Trarner> a'a,.thoi.rg? k Mrry Turner testified

tha`" he had er"icCY ,,'"s"1'N ered M,z,, Parker a couple times tl in the . tr^,^, t. " TT2 at 199; TT3 'I;'.

126,«"7T'. Ga.rrett tea°4,ified 7,it after a ;:.Ieriodp the 'o3e!;! ]a4e1s't to Ml'•:*'S Tu;rmurs

3

-1^ f c s .r ^ a TT^ tt 199 Imp I ^ J f + :: r'! l r; 'I:r"

-t' ^ ^1 ^^ ^_ l ,.. ,. . ....^ i .^^r ^3^r.`r' s.. =n._^ Ira'. „lr_ r l^'^f f.., t Î

q?a , hq and Mr. Pprk ._m__ .. T:_ WN`; to a g: n ql^ I;

+-_, . r of El' 1 Gm.: Ai i ort " I I I+., , xe tO PL &MP a,Lgar^.. e TT2 .. 201

thi: ; I +ll']F.rû0 Oil 4 -3 __, 04 . ^ «

^°€ ^ ....,,W^ ..

"^T1. .wM}:. 202,252,i. 4 r ^ „3: F.. I ..-. - I ^. .. _ .. ^.I

i ,arrett arvd Pix. > rk

1 ktta] C^'". to c ckav nqd r- M ; . a I . 1 i !:7." +. ^ 4wu„ty °a'.ri

p1Evu{ kc. -!'':- ". rau d1 ;nki , 0`"'Tr€' tI w , r"L. _. V 7, TO r: 'C _ %,.»_. Ga C,„; tesCa t Nd thal.t,

^`, :s I ' n^.I Mr. P'''i'.. ° .1; i' (: to ^'"€I;^. "".^7^^1'ek"Ii!i" . ... k ^,'z°^'/°w ,1â ,. „.".^h'^'3,a:^ nq^ t.'s !^"q ^^

^^ ,^C^C^ _: , . 51 p n. TT2 2110,^1.5,' 14 c^^'^^w n o,.

t, r.i o . an, ,

V er ta f ed h- a walked t a 0 , I k , ,

, :+^îng ^ -in .n -in na. . :+.rkd alocr his s1`tirtm TT3 133, 13Y. e„

At rpprtJX; tely 11: rM.l'i., : J ,. E,.i.ii°,i. tI"t ._";! C,.C^'^wt ^ ^;1 Fk»7r^..^ .^3^'^""'nwatue^" U'afk ^^ ' r'l ^^ "aITt

A" .s r r..I }"kis twia'J to visit a Ni anC'? who lived in ^ h- Byrneport Ak.1e.C a.;:....tM nr"k

k + !. JN ^ Ci C";oadH TT4 73^ 4. He T:;? twi f1:f h-:i^' S^to^,^, pP. f:^ at a

7un.'_ . Vn r".rpo.i. Ea i ' I . : : . g t u o \ d to g f ..:m, aCt:'1v.U;,.!' a T14 Y:a 74w

Mr« ani . a _r • ft9dy°1 h! Mr„ P. r, _ i g a4' d . .. T'..iTI r 'tae v t Cèê

c:onveni^: rkce ,/ges a' tion, -k,l ey 4° tt'. ,, , Vta his vk_ .i: . TT2 a t_i Ar,:

u anC'aer hr'1d never mC: C. M;:I.'". Caarreti", M . ^ Tura 1e 1.'.,. 1 j:l . IarCCpr , a"i . .he'4d him prior C'.". I''iay

1, 2009. TT2 ah 207; TTw^ at 1 32, ; TA r.+ t 72, 74a Mr:. C= _ t 'k,estitieEi + °t i.:. hs, spokei

wg th M;r:, Br,.'ker, in ,' lg that h^^ ^âd ;1n4 I. .r't" r`rdr ' . TT2 a^ 206 , . 91 a... ^T4^ „^^ ,,

at 75: h" . Ll n p k ';" M > .( n l"hat he tC1,1 s :[i°l_ ":."F^ p'I"G",^"î^,r;^^""kC^ $'@ti:r'ii I^^.i. _ s:".µ... LJ."-,I;

. greeG';C the f09 T- ni _., i 9 l I l± Ily::C L"i+;= 1't r discussed aY "^ er MIr .. 7 anC:1 his

cm Pr., ^'^'t ECi ^^ atp^â'^^.o^^s went .:.r"^w.^ ^,^._ c^.,: v af 'n. _ _ •^Z ^; ^^^; ,.r . ^,,.3îit ^"^;I +^'da.:IC^ ^ ^ pt^..^hû^^^",:^^. "f"^ k".;

207; TT4 at 75,-6:, F"r, Soak,rkr waliid ,i,n rti a s;t.':n.. TT4 at 76.2

Mr. .C'', vaJ.reIt d'. k°«t;C "C"h: 1 lI!y he, M:?:. » Pr:'92:°K4"w:4r, aC"^d Mra TI-fl.I" tJ.ie.1 e in thr.. Storem

f'1ra Turnr.-,r i,r " d ryirv Garret' tha t he Vr, t r d to rob Mr. bak . . TT2 w 706. M:r,".,

Ga:L' eC. „ al^3o '^1,> K„^'"d ^":^'1^" ' ^":! told Ms'# ia'^1f^"s 0 gad^;','LC.";1"I d^'^^k' ^.w61": ^î . ^ C"'x; was " f'+i"^^

aC" # ww th . ,.i.6"k*"...dt"n, tC'1et Mrs Turner told him a+; that t"9:.1 k'?4wE1"k A TT^'' a' 21

^ - ^ '^ .6„ Mr. .":I.'L"r`'w""^. tt teT...7: !.G1<ed th a t ey.3 ", asked Mr,„ Tur3`"ti.wa° _ t 'â„„! ,. tdlr.,^:ir, t o.LGr^^:'S^+ .^^';r ,

rag r. ' ; , it4, did not t,;.7ke r'°ird. Turner r 1 ly, TT2 wi'Y„ 208 . M1:` Tt.3rneT" testified i:;r`te^:

. 1!!r.!r:.'+rw:. ,",i,ok"'P did iot hr .,..t„Ipûyl'"6 ,. T6 3 LL 163, MS:'. Tki C",t?!st.e,f,:.ed that t}ll.' t^ ^rea?

5 C"ol'1 N,..nt into tC F T; and YI1;?:;ji., their p1:.:rcha'"+? s. TT3 at 129

r yu^+^N ^.p^^^1''+ ut n r C. +^^r 1.+^+^ ^^"^ C fit w ^,0"G'^ I J t h e V/kA

p^+^. k..`.^ k^t^"^^:` drivin g, M' E^Î I^^^k.^`1 1^ ^tl [ v^

JII: .3t^ `'.:.btli^J .:,,L"^^ the ^+ ,^j . 'iiF I^M

BE3:la. :S+_^:9.eif^ ^^ T"^ the. .y p^»t.",:.,. :;a'C^ I"Î` ^ .^ '^^ r" ^. ?" r'^ r! e,^ C i ' ^" r• T .2.+» T"k .... ik"C f'i^^"^^^; ^: ^ =s'" 1:wx^.fJ Ii:: &

4

thrB?l 4 t , h the pr'I s,.^,^ 4,. ^'°7.W .. wW _.. Caroi.:,. €' i .; T' and ';: r, i l diractly Mr. A Tlp^ »

Cia^Pral;3"ker, also antF'^r,;l..tFC`p t^^,.t"t„^l.i'^^'i t^^^' pa:rt^4^1"'if-" s^..': C."6i"g^.1 C.^f:-o.^:', ^"ttP'9g ly ^'

Mr . i,"@ arret'^.. . 774 at 2 06."" 9 a t T,.8 f;lt 31 s # € 4 a 1. k .3 l "" u'. F Ti `4' t a t f 6:. Mr.:x r.} fwi u cw,dr led.. tr f,,, ad

that h ttF y,.: `' to ^ Î.^". S ^°".. ^^ I ` tt,P,`r: ^..C^'Cp.! .'1^' "^rwi, 1' A^! Frsl6.^c (a. ^`G,.,

R ^rcmf . . di 5 iI`dg , o. TA a%,: 75 M"> . i tes;'° tl ^ h- J., C1.Ja"„ tk"3i4:i . 1 , a

f ,.irrw._ .,. ' c,*r:"rwg t-r:,,,.n s^.^c'l""I _ w the Yl`1n R ..,. 7r,rtnà Ap . e q Tw at 209. Vx I . rnaw

io:a tifi1^d that Mr. €. grrw'' t ,111ply tal hat ^''^',7" v a.;iunkt' ' "3 J.ng to give t1! "'

r ^'9a :C'i6"^,^ ?:' yyr to the

,il_ ^r^:::î"r^`^^ ^M^Si3T° F II"' + ^. TT

^^,J r.^ ^V '^ w«, a.

.'^ :^""""G"^ t^ i ^ i

1 "{ M' . . rr!: .. ' ry I ' .Ir.' ' d „r'"4".'7 ve tt.". M' W ci ... r., S,} k d. ... . . .v..iw :

^ . u^"M: a• I°. ; 1 ;1 1- q3 ' -7:, M^'' r ;«,;.^ ,a', .' t 7 ^., i mvillu^,Ît f,_, a^ CJ^^ ^4, ^ .; ^1 « y

ified • I .o he ,`' m, I the ti,krS'"@ to gi"J t;' T . ,_ 1 " l.' _'u? !."° I i Afi ^,' "a o ? I

oi, ^â ^h^.^^ r" , ^; :N ^.^" '^ to ^.^ w :^ right m^^ ^^`^ n t n t ^ ,-'^: ^ ` ,1f'^ of ^' " K^' ^.

,..,e .=rr „ TT4 B"v.. 76-1, Ha tmst f W_` , s^ri ^^° u^^f ^°:I^L_ , ^ ^ . ,' (1. mo . .^

-ut ^ :^,i ^ ^p w. ^ 7f ^^.' ^"^" a^ " at 77 M'arM. ; •9 t t^' s1" if ad

v f y. lI"f4da"!lo Courts rfrp" - I mr he mma."

HO7.i !'I ":5cA lF f.: nn, .i C . Nn 11 y 93 57„

Mir.^î.ii .ÊI_ .^.•S ;11.^:"1_... t ..l '1l'; I`V'::_:l wl".!l ti:"r ' _. îghL•s out;i ! AWq W

v-ìcle ?',urming. TO ut 211 ; TT3 Lt 133; TT4 at 77- a and Mr. R . e,.. thu r',

negC3 t.t.ating the wi^, le of the mr2ri;ju"n.^ , w,"' "h Mr. Booker wantir' to ui:.au c. 1gf,:;i ,

a,^^.^^ ! ^. ^^r^' ^d"Ct^ at 211x i`T3 at 133; TT4 ;;,,.i^.W.. 78. Mr. C,.,ra "f . .^',:^.v^^ ^,t..^-,î,r^ °r'h.;

,I.nir"estiC.)e• Ak1 that he sI"lolaJr'd [lr« I^ ^nkin,:P MY- ij1.lsnery evCr"'€^ gzatti,i " out his jl"^""^"le tn

weight ony v: riaûs begs of marijuw:ri^^ 't' r a^: er. TT3 a[, °! ::'.^.. CA^', E^r^^,^€» .:^ ' t^,^..f;i.^w^^.,

that he e>wamined the rnWrriju;ana and w° - ;, : ; witl-^ the qki ?it+^ ^nd t1°'Ee; he told

Mr. Garratt he won nG,tt interested lra pu;C"ch<3c.:a„i"°sg any of tiYL ^T4 ^7 8k `"".^ a

( a]:":;4 e"!.t tOatifiSL thm h" t.ld a deIxL ctive f"' n.JI..: o"^ inEht 4rn interregai i<o1"€ of him after +t e

.1.,nC:i,2lw?nt tha"t'W, G.{hil.i C"li . : !"' wa^.ws examining h„"', ma.l::ijLai.n^.:^'y r,. TI.1"n R' I1 "h"i" .

sr'r t of the vehicle u-q . n 7 . Booker 3 purchase I , d ;° 'ik hi.. LN i Cf ,

of the quality. , TT"r a" 13-4m Mrx Tur r'• m:;,. ed ; c': l c, ; i p' : ::r° ., TM. 3 at 165,

TurT'tr;r ese I 1iIwrvP., that It YaLS t^^^^ le the i tmrs taking Q

d G '. .' W to rob Mr, BC.^ck?" + TT4 at 133, 136. ("ê t(r" i ii ied trl a w. h..: gave no indiW'a. ., :°tT"tl H.

ti W'of4paP4io9'3s as tfi;i iiri _ he xa.9as pl.aF'in;1:.Cag 1 .. d1'.1', TA at 162. Aga(.,r1, Mr. ;.iar+.^' ?tt

.Asd that Mr„ Tk..dr' r. hmlà.C T.!"^dicaI.eC'1 an Qt,: i!'; i7 . to rob M.. v F:oC.Vker while ir, i pa:;i

s a "r on/1,..IJ nU en«L en cIK'w ..^'.w I n.:. ' m 7 T2 a"k. 200,

Mrro Booker tast. ! hr.r;a k while the nega° i a'r ions we^ nrGq, . !:1 1 , Mt Parker and

Mr. Turner were CEi ckJ Wng w;¢. i 1 'CMhir 5g among themselves. TO a,. 7^+' . i'':r. E I frn...r tmat1fieC.^

that while the nanwavionL o' oc~u:^rin^.^, Mr. Booker kept looking back at him. TT; t

5

Mr. Garrett tt^ ^^ tifie ma • v "; i : u€:b tre%Y"!: ', ct`c"ot"E we h! Ct' a Mry 07; i

,Om^'^ str3rtE""O fm r4:9b ,^'Je.1tE.<'ri`1 040=& TT2 at 211. Hlw to 'I" E^ Mr,, Turner Cc'

I"IIlJlY»no" njl &Ai g to MA. PPI' ...-r'"9 but that hq .nb.j,^43^ri1A"h'•,^,w

1.^4kM.34lEbin"o-.A' what 1^`^.1.+ Turner S.f^:^^^.r

E. y:,r pe Q .F !n ,-ap toetified b t Mr. Turne i __ h ;^^g tr^ the off, of ^^gi%,j. me

er, '.f i'!, în got. '{ TT 11L. H^ ^ ^^stif. ^ tnot , O t1:.9'^ êe t 11 r

, ., . :i' i1"- . ^'1,1^"n^^^° p 0.1ir:^ ^ !'^î l I : ^^^^"" . Ws. TT

ww^

e^=. v, t, :^^!J

h,,,j'.. ^ wr tha:t his", ald a f UVO I lga± lng him 7 1 2 C K40,

, ,; E1; , ^ ^'.:,J^"as^w ^'^^",: it.t.r.l3ku:"" I`^'i-''^^"'Y'1!^ ,, weapon eaa ff ^ i97't,û... '^7^^ûC^"i:'^k ^°'"« T`^!?", r z...w red Q. w:'w..,..h_k.. ^.

turn over his pro,_ ! ., . TT3 at 11, 14 w

Alterraativel', 7' .. _ , , i _::' t after Mr. î '.kw;: had _ d and loaki 1 w„i°^^p

, zilta u _ 0 u!n ^^C.'. 1C"!i^ r ch 1 "his Ca ^.t.^^„^'al ^' a^71"9 'V ?!'r ^^ ^"`M el:wu'", ^,. m .. ., ^, w

"give me what yo.a ai !: . , TT3 at 138 . Mr. Ttlr!'°, put h s } Pr^

r 1 therri 4 ! . x Tur i . t ^„ tî^. N t^ r k,t.! 1^r,i..,,.`^;,.,,^,..«

^,^'a side.

^,,"" ae. M.

;.. 138,. ^ n ^, t :.%L. ^ ^..; . y ^". ^„î^til^ti^ .^..â ^ ^n, . "u^l..^^^.^.."^^"î.^

if his êed end derrr :m ^ Ihirl^ 4- had. TT4 at 7E3.,.K

Mr. Turner êatitied i m:^ itmd in turnh,.ng evl.r to him, so he ; ,vtoI

G.li 9"k:pp,., Mrp ^',:+ooker i:aC"d th oi, od around hi, eytiw' TT+t at 137, US^ 17,.^ ," 1"

I:,'P,"w9 k^ ^ ^ h, I,: „'7 l,.t^ I V_ Ukw Iw: d Mrn p no•..r ,f_1 „ h .! t p! }^^y, nt + { T3 at t I>t-. n. W . K6atl

Ma. x. ....,. "a;ì ,lcf ai,' H . ,ir..;n'!i y am i r - asìd Mr. Turner h , " ., from N

[""Y! Or g , 1"TaC'1d. TT3 at 139. i'rfe, Tw"nf^^,^T' tar..a ,. ,fi,.,,d ta"! i t while the rL" , bbeT „ ti1a:'^`.f l'°d'.ccCr,dr.G .6,t Cgp

Mr. W., .. nll;` Mr. Pi:1I:"k .y .... shoL~kemmlNt.! the ...v. 0H Tt3 ^.t 13Z

,I!. .. ! ,_ -A 14r. v r_ _olf :, .r I .. !' K..ed t1 Mr, In_ . L ., "r ml:d. ..., U1

t i.V !'C;' 9ry F: a^^;4a i fc!'^^^"4'L^';iC r ^f 1"i rp.t srol^r ,. id to . ,k ^^'. Tt^r^^. : I i

wh?,.7„+.:.d 'mi€<er and hurled wrl.vult a I-rTr,. TT2 at C ; TT3 at 16; 1T4 WON

Mrw t;aoks t^^ ,^stz f:;~ead t?r t af, : y^^:^ he had .... over his ,. Y ., r,ty tm TVIr. Turner , M .:. w

Garrett ree"zch ,r frt",3m '>LL. pP'-`"sr" r I end ata:ix','S,et' a,eap.chil"^g his G"leràona Ti4 :?t

79. Mr. 004P t ,..i f:.w.:G;i r r°! hr a. ro'. ted M.C. Ga; 7 ett7 . wweaT"chy '^r,' . Turner i' :

trJh1,.pps,d, h"iflT^ ^T4 at 79. a7:1°q iW.. Tilx"C"'i:.^'k" C^,'^F'tCêd ,Ctr.3.king Mr. Pi•.,, i, r &,'$ tm" t"!dm had

ra5ceivH::d the p.âperty,,.

Mr. t i u:t ok: C:.'" r tE. stw fied that h',;°P Ci , "+J e M7' , Turner mont=" ^.^ :a'#"€ d hisis C all p a TT4 at t 80.

M]' :, Tt,dri" '"' ^'^ ^'^.!'^t^'' that f.^y was G1!"^-+t„;^ê of p*."o^rl !'`t'^+ , dC:.y. „'^"µC:o o tr'F'a, l^. ^< .. ," then ^',n.. ... . ^ 4a ^ ^" ^ ,

^ " a'^^^^' M9 ^'^'waltWI"i, Cr... K..., I I t ^fl.^"^ E'Cal7ts^`^' ".tC"d b.`'zC,^M:a. ^" ::3 at 168: Hr C`.,ir t t ,..o,, . ^^^k.2^..fW4p i

,i h'I but r:t')t'Ccad^":Ca tf"Ea:il: a cell p;'' a FCNkI..EkId later at the iounR of 1"h^,? incident was Y"?at

hi. s. TT 3 at 1 6f,l w7Ì , After Mr u: Turn LL robbed Mr. Smoker, b r err^d Mx',. Waker t;:r unlock

thi^:^^ doors of the van< TT3 at 16µ7, Tf'4: at 140. Mrw Ga:r re f W ; h.. l 1 exited =.'-:;

veh.^clr•= and G:rp.wrm.Nd the cargo dou^ to let Mr. Turner and Mr. P.rker aut of I %, :n. TT2

t;

a^ 2"^4«-5 , ^'_." `^-}a f1r „ r e .. ^°^'^^,^" #'. ,,:, I^ s. rc.:rr tl ^^ger w.^^^^^r^ ^;râ;. !^ ^r :_ n

I get_ Wc outw TTI ,. G. . Mr. "C ., r°t r a_l _ „°t , W. a , that hp+

u a. w` -Yii 1 ^( _:^1 . ,171 < ^'^'3 r'^"^, 140. ^*I'r'« " : i'i"I1 :r^^^f^^ u^'lr+s+"8.^" ^v^^^^";xâ. ,^,^' to ^'r{^, n^. with Mr. ^

*ri, Lf- th,: j he intended an leaving tho sh en;..w quickly.k 'I"13 ut ^40r 112.. Mr,. F x Ot:w

testifi rnm. Mr. Turner, before closing the cargo door, said "yea, Li tah` a Mr.

BacG;er.u T"[':^ at 28-0

Mr. Booker tsstx ft.y, har as Mr. Ur„ r and Mr> Parker exitmd the cargo doo"r, , Mr.

Garrett wes stil't . iq in the pE _. n met. 'F'U a 80-1 . HfY testifit.,,d °that

,^h ^:^ ,

^^r. G,,,^,.^'^W ^,..r .,;,^,^C a s^"^^. ^^ €^^'" E- ^.c^ a a^"}t^ a I ..u,_. , TT4 ^^t: 0l^^^7 . @"^s;^":° w r. f_ r. ,:^r^^^.^^ ^^^w^-^ ^ ^

WON{ . . '"Im sI? Mk;;Ci'.i . I handgun from M r. ! '"""r^'^'tt 1 s lap, the two ..a t: 'lJggled.y Lad

Mr . with 1 _."^ , eA".'^,'^' "^ }"aCj ' f,`w " C" I6Jai1; ; ^ I . ..i^;â:'^ . T'^"^t" at ^;i1-2,^_W ,. s ,. , ,.

nl, .anati^ ly. Mr. r tified that ei^ ^^^ ^^ ^ ti^g va.it of t1 trM treA-,iclty w iie

t,°g,. 1ki^^ Itowe:^d Ai Yi bdy!; i . TTL n 214-5; 237-8afe t^stifiad that . was

unsure uti3:h waywJhis r 17h'^"Ê (' '^^'2 at `^°^^^ Ht1&^t;^*>VG^'^"5 °s''î.^' t"

tes'^ ified that h., told a d^ .ar tiv^M dur° ir. Yg , ,w.M i<a ^ ,. rp. araetian thet Mr. T r int Pr>W+un+:i

°r: , ck if the van and Mr„ Parker went around the front o^^" the v-P„ TT3 A 17: He also

"je V . 'iC I_ , ''l'a told the detective tht; ia Ira Booker got out of 'f Vvl"k;, at Sa3hI;",«'; joint

Mr. T' .' g , out of th P oCa and went i rr" u1"! he back of it _ I., r ? in `.i _,I o+.,C t or' Od

walI;Fng a^^^^ from the ;a . TT 3 a 1, g 11„

A to wflat; hi],7,:,i;i'ned 11, .;t,k th:.. ..'ty of Mr. Ga,T`re, ty Mr. Turner, and Mr. k atw k'.J>

diverge even m+.ra i ^^.

Mr. Garrett ^^ôt 'F ôt as he was walking away from the v'. ;'7 y he heard ; ,.. t. T7"2

at. 216. He t^st3fied r...... was between five to ôn fe^^ away fi . om the van when r,

tho shot ancl at thst, point ^^^^gan to û?., „, TT2 st 216. W "^ ât,^ fied thei'^ as tw; a:.

runn3 ngz he turned afiid wEfLJ slr,. TUrnar run behind the van with Wm in ;""Iek"a1"1 i xf;'1

ext-vk& and that h heard a seconcC shot. TT2 at 216-7; 218. After the second s ,'' , Wi.

^ Jisr.',a that h r Mr. Turner "fl,y+ bac', with hiS gL.n in his haf~sd," T72 at 218. Hi:w

fêd 9.rtryt h I a total of two - „ TT2 at 217. He test7.fied that he did not

, Parker d^rl'^ this time. TT^ at 217.

Mr. Garrett fu l""he7:" t-pst;'t.fitwt'i :;hal v=1 told ,ci 19J FaI.J::7°in.g his i,YGo,tiar,roa°c:i.....t:'n

Wu"1aT wh-^Ca mT'" K. ^,;ooKe7' sa'.i3 Mr. r'Ir.p Mr. P. rP a,kiC`9g their mC,avl.'a y " fm l'

whor ng " 'FT3 st, 22. Mr. Garrett further tr stified tha^' . he told the datectixrs tht" h^^::^.

w1!':.^ . . d Mr. Turner rurf to the back of th^,^ van, Mr. Parker run to the front. of the

van, ' io he Bew Mr. Turner ^âinting his gun at Mr. Enok!v and "^heai saw Mr. Turner fly

bacigwarL , K TT3 at, 40. !-iaw.;ver, ^^ redirect, h test.X fi,v.. : ho he wa_ unsure whether his

statement to the detective regarding Mr. fii running - ounc the b-:,cMC of th:,., ryt.:rs and

Mr. Parker running around the fC"ot7t of the Vk." waa t7`l::fe. TT3 c.d:,' 52:

7

Mr. T4 n:4 .ni':r +rust_» fled that after extl;06 a,Y'"& I ° »9 to a: etu"Yw to the UAWa

^ ^., 4^'t '^ 4"^ « ^Îî ^'Et,, t.^^.u^ f w ,^ r^^'^^ i ^"^ c^(^r . . „^, t,^^;.1C,,r exiting I»al^:^ 'l T,^ 4 _ ^C,» .» . ^ , i ; :'; r "^,' .^;^.^, . ,

h . _ O" , i ^; ^ ^ ^^ i^9 " i t ,. ^.':. :G r^â:^s Crû.^:^:"^ ^^r^^r y _ + .y^_,:.^"Yg the°^^"^^^ ,^1,~,^^° of ^ k,zl ^/an,^ ^ . i __r ,r1^7.i ^

tv! t. o. ' 1 r cl ta r c i . A r . ! d W f l _{ "'& and felt ^ ^ , an he

It.,"1i I aa'If:^' f`:Li.èd :. .^^`^ "'`ê C»i,?.L' 0 ^»'^n"€,: of ^^"^ van. TT.^ at 1^'"^ ».u^^. 1^-r^k.^^

teSU A"'!".1 * }"fls:lt a --: ound of t3"II G i 1 . ' + ' r he àaw Mr. Ft W " ,. hey M

Tt ,"I ""1` d the 1J ^Î. .^'^T'i k 14,^^ .'.-.:^« }tia? tâsCA'^ ^..d not .ê^s"^` ^^ + ^ ^..^ , ^^ ^'^"t^.^"i ., .

""^ i: i_ . ? . i i . ."» 142. ^"I! ^, î.^k,'..auM iw^ t4^'^c1 i; cC^. ^"1;' wr,,w; n<R.^^^'^ u7'^''nL,1"1i.1 '^^, L: e, ^'W^Îu ^,",,

^S.,iW Mr. 4 : C ; i' t h.: C hCy l t"' . TT3 r t 143, 145. He tC;"st::1,fi^,^!d that t!:'?

return 1 re from cover of ,' v .. TT3 at 144-5. He h"estif: _' that tle gat

t.3ff . .,. ha"a"s when 1"7:Ls "1 d u 1m TT3 at 14 ^-7» He further tew t " a belie'4i'oc;i

'M,-1f iF had failed to hit , ,L. Bac(^^ ^ ^^^ any _ . p T3 at 146. Mr. TL C^. oss ;

^ . * X7l^ C^',r€„1: & "^^d^Ìi" ^.t^''.n ai"^^:' ^.fl»„s^^;;:^ ^";1... : ^^pe".^!âconcadqd hCah ht^'t!^ ^^ c r ^^:'"Ii^d'^ .,. u ^:,heard fÎ,

hJ, l: I I th btkrllF: ts I:L. _ x TT3 at 174.

t^,l„^c the r^^.^ri away f^:'a F ". -;tr", f^wâ"^.^^^k"» trG"7i:S}^6^; f .,_ '^ . :i that, c:^' : ^^' ^^,? 9G3;^^^ »

Garrett ±W+el?ed oi_. , . ly°4 •rflg Too ir +r.. that Mr. Sock r had r,"t , rondgfl.. "Ct', .,t 82. Mary:„

" th.,^Smoker t'. stified that hi M t 1 . i ' _; i , r . , 1"arret 9, flK k l , cene anR C tri o

who h^':^rJ b»an in d:he vw:n c4µfls'a^,^ around the rron'?: oi --i!':m viorJw TT4 ar 24„ fh-,,^

:^ ^ o " :^ ,1 'î^li' i "" ..1`'"1, whom ^"a" later ^ ^la^,^, R"li.:^"E:^ i" ,'"^5:.'^r ^^c„r. ar". ^Îr. T^dr »N"_ J^^ Gk`^^ ^"'+ r , , ,

'iia't 3^: y,,, , did nc'. W_ _I', ^ r+ rw.. . k" E h d a gun, fl ?" ^^ 4 Mc^'k. 4.1 3.. ' ! e te'a,tified^ c.

that as 3t Mr. "arker, W. PoY " .: WO 'i^' w ^T4 at EV

In . ; 9'^°f^'f . im whom ^"ti^^':^ »•^„ : I ^^'I^"i^`' ^^Mr. ', ^^ fa.a1:' ^ c . ! Fd , ;'i

Ta»l;E',"Y1W!rfi I,„ aCI1,;;.. around the bs[ k of tho V1:.°i his gGik'1 pulled «3nCi f' ,7 i' I" " 1' f'lr»,

_ 7!- ;.,^^ . TT4 at 63»-,4. He test." f ` hat h: 5 e:;urnt; d Mr. Turn..'rr s f.1.ra. TA at 84. Mr.

Coo!. . r t.^stifi^,^d t1 . Iue firad total of three or four s^^ ts anei hacJ thr^.^+sa or four

hat;.r fi: d . t him. "C T4 at ts 4..

^„L;A n., , who li41 rw d near th!^:: "î, d that at J un, m?. dn. €»y ^'1'^ or May "^ ,

2009, @a.fhJ.l.1 in Ci7 s hCiI..E;;Jk^, he heard four or t LL ` ptd fire siic 1p fired I't - ' . TT

at 273, 21Et7ro !^^ry Ct^hie wha sl,,u lived , .as,. tho n._ .fie1:1 thay, e•,"

i}° xim^êl,r midnight ar°t sa.s.d da°-es he and his wife had gone to t+ k. up_ tairs of "r~"heir

t ^ to ^}^;'C.,^ and as _^' J:Cè ^,.e^.ro4fs.ng C^.1^TÎ^.J^"i „ tIt.! 4""^'i:i^.["^.":s ^î.4+'•x (^^' w:;t:, r171.^1 'C'"^ 'rîi^,: t go .

C i'ra from the e Mercer Str' ' _ his housm„ TT:' al;, OJ 7

lll°. Garrett test_.fieCE th°" _f h'.'„'.!wa,r:"a tLtJ+.. .°ho:s, 'ih'h':•+ van hul"l.E. y lC^°f,. ^ny

; e.,etii:; ,t ^T2 at 217.. He to; .." fi.+d that ef " VC:: van skc.6lled r':,',way, _ he ::r"4 C .. _i `` D return to

'^:;^" ' ^(f':ed"!î"If ..::'^' ill;3»!= îet^"{fl^.,^ ^'^"^ k'^ k""+., rA'^'^"the '^^ '; he ^'P•1de.^? ai^fê.!. T^^ "i^ ^:,^..^. ^^^. ì^^,^"^ ,""^:, ad"'^'"i u'^^ ^1 ^^.^^.. ^"y.,

I m I E f ^ ...'^ at 219; 24^"^r ^'r„ Garr^^..^ ct!^°`f: . _ Vwî ^;IN.1e]f^^re returning. T1"^-b,.detective ^;.îw^^, Iê âs ar°ri^ the van }. r^^3..^".away, squea:ling nam , on^^ A"ak at th , x.,

6

^ thuught, t^-i him^,:êl``;. "rr.aii lie gG;^^^ away r. and th.-:,t fie Mr. _!^' roker

m g, ^^ be ci,l .. lirg bar.c tr W loca: ior`!^ . TT3 at 27x

i-,^^ teu^J,?.^.ea.i i:^`1 ; tM after he kt!^.^^^ ub""" p C^C. âeCu ^"7^.^.aL. â:G.? wa1 ^„ ; Gc^!Cn;r. Tutn,. ^° ..

b'f t ^„"allepas. C;ai near €"°!R." u C h. _ kxWa'°°, and lam. C'un4. civ` . +w. T"'3 P^P" 147 !'w{. He tou .',,.a. { : .. .I: i:

m^ von was still the:: . i; . he cc:I.W ,. , ' r r-d los° t , c . E TT3 at 147.

Mr. kâs^^.^^ w t^^. W ^'mic.c^ -Ka'^: after ro7 in,;,k - u^^s -, + i ^, . ,, ^; back "' U. ' ; i 'k _ ;^ ^^' °^^w n

i, r'^ LJ^^ ^*° â ^^. TE ^F a?'C. ^.ufi.7° 1^ A He test ' .^'^ t" 1 ; ^( ^ ,^^^^ u a^s y.,^.. 1l1i rI ', B^," ^,^°' I r . , .,. .. b^v w^ F- at

3'^. i i, .

h : . . s1a lit; C : e 3 C x ^ ^^ ^ ^^. 0 4 l h ' V J the r, n 9"t 7: C"':?„s v Y.. u : tn

C"6e âV t! f r .t „^^ gh^'^.'^': , turn cito Ad.: p.. . § .Jh>sai 3 _ .._ig tCae .ca1°' nl.:ar

a ^ 1 '_I •I in and t dt h.Iving s: i ip14In r- °l. 7 wk"e,." uI ter 41 . 61" ll*3,' .

T "r , t ' ^^^s to the A n T . ' m n Y r

r cE ^ i' . . . I . . . l, i.^ T4 a-t G'.' , He

pa:;t, r' t ; ri '_ t' i^ . ti W Iti,t ad

, „ .`^tô.. TT4 ^^ ..._.„•9. Ce + F eoi ^li f r' n i, i: I . a.

». ^îU`_ l.a k'aas TA at Crt",^^,^' F ra;., te.^`F.:^^,. c.^:,a^ he ^.aM7cI i4fl^t .^,L?^ », f ^ '^^^; 1^^C. : teli:':

d oI'? W A T4 at cr'.^ i.,.90 . He C ,r;I: "noA ° e 1" I d1 f, -1 ish:,. ,., m El J.

d }êir^g hit in ^^r, k y ^.^ a^^ . TT4 ^. 92. ^1^

J to the hospital C.i vv- he tiaM

tz";e'jn..' b n, 1jisl'ê and the affect 4* hLsclu::aur' I. iielf€w FeCas-,;ra.^

Proba4 ion. TT4 W 4:

M ,. Banker - . that the rsext a~ây: hi IneG"`ned that ^^nmw^nne had bet;hr Qat and

kill& the p^'° vi ^4i . P , ^'"^`4 at 90. I-C 1 ,,^'^.;^,-^ l^^d . ,^ . °^^,. his p^^^^ ;^ât:g.

1 . 1 . . e. ?. ,. 1 . TnC' 4 Lt 1s.".. "i.,, 7„. He te .i t;1. a, ed ^1 .. "C he called hi fxmiY ' ,n: ^.3

d.; ..".„Lder,.i tr' . , should „^",,,o to CC?lL3mE]uso C"ChM.G? g until his WilwJ ca€!ld r ?, ss ok"IC"J . i.':fl 1 r., w

ta hire "r.:,:l _ "C_r'`p:°,y. TT4 at 90-1, He ;'L?sC„ifiel.C he was ; til I.aall<rfllbi.l:s far aG7pro,,:iT''ktlte.C.y C1e'

month when hM, was picked up by the U, !^ . Mergholl> TT4 at 91.

Mry Bwker :stifiei tC'?at, wCtile J belng robbed, #lr r at?out (bis

siste[` who had b , 011 rrV-ry id C;C"ke`C`, h., was ^.'^fra,LF' o u.la!„"; _ing to be

ki1.led. TT4 at 80•W1 . He #`. 1.. QFi . !'êt he sho'!:, at the ±v . ^ . i,C A

^ ;fec„w: as to 1:tlh l jP Is:";^r'."C.^ going "i'_ k !: y mt;4.^'I^ ^'C"?pa^^':^.'^'?..... , ^.ltiJ ,.i„ T.

('$Ir, ârrott Pn>wf ili:,G:a;.l..rY 'C31:" C,YI...w c ::; least one t.l" the". a.n1ISJ..,..'I..P N +-n Ci'X. "@,.. y1ee gun. T14 z'

91-3n Mr. "L Jk,l._ ra_'C.i'? ieil tC'"} '., the ck:!2l (3hC?ne found at the crif1"6e sce;1e was hY.sw TA at:

^ 34--5; {ùe further 1 i1c ''' I "' I LtC°kon hPS w7a being robbed aT"}d "!f t ..' h:"3 u.â..r afraid and

,<pec if'i,ca:i ly denied r Bing apÈg r 4 'I^^`Y at 11 '.:{ ..

Detective Kermit QL1? n!"Y:. I^;?f the Ht•.Gmi :ie Cr!, vi. !.ai "aIF the Toledo PPpl„t.C',.;! ..i l:l

, ' ^ ^^ r`^ ^ ? r^ ^ r ^:: n m.., c^... x^r7.w_.F^ o ^.c^.^r „.e., t^^^ , 1=^,y .too+itied thaf, tre was the 1,oacy ir7vesw,, , ,°F - 11. ... . .

9

2009» Tf 4 ! t 3:"^ w Hi' tewi t:r fied that .ks part of thî` ._..4 3i,1t;?.t 98n y he p'' "!I' f K V:I"tl•.i

G;. 'Mlntl•w'w coWat;"' 1 7.... lG."tillnto!Htl'"€ TnlE:dt:.W TI a t. «.:3-'^4w D°uteIW"^':' W,.i i l.t i.^

.^"i X U

,. s ^^.'S

.. ,^: _ t: ^^. `,^

.^ a^î^ n C^ _ ^.

_.. ::

In ;nK _nd l W ", ^,, I . T T4

^7a Htl« i^'.5t.wf^.i d 1^.1 . ". ^''u,"fi`'Fk». rn : ^^^^ i.^

van with krir: q„a .,i,kln i1" „ li"I"i. TT4 at 57,. f Garret told ;t.€m ;"i' ino'

^^+"3Y^1."^N r, iIi 1:,a he ^"ku:^^ld,=wfr "k°"^":1u:IY tlW:^:n^""^" t»^C^'^'"n,^.^.,!^y, ^"^:"": Parker h^.";?s"^f" to " , , i

o"' irner , toward t. . - of the van. T^ ^ at 30. M:,x:° :. QuirK,

f1 k, hen Mr. Ga;l. r^ tt U1e, i d, hFii a scale I J"t. th a p 9ll

MMOL.'^ Of Cf1O,T'i N it an Yi"_' P;"rson. TTA 442,

D,.tectiva Chad Caulpert, a minoi r of ;h: Cc! w!, f;ir ;Gnv : n Una.t of ' Tw° l

Pr..l',ca Depa. tmE"9"I!'' , te.^'a t..f1"#w.l:.: ,' » sn5, u.Ir:lE. I I . g as a SIU a.n1! r a; i .'! ., 1, 2009

, ^'wnK .'3t'' un.,1„ t,^^s In1..^:tl.s^: to :.=14.'r ^.ic^:^kI. "'"'"^ tlt:;; s^"d1^^9'1""?^'tC~j, T3â at l^'-^4 ^'iP;:^ "s"G .^.^^^"^ ..a l^';

II,' ;r'`" I^ , C^` ?"4f "^ 2".1; 5 - ? . '^T^. a, ^.^m'^ . He `^:r I y(^ . .,ain ^"^'a^' 1 ."

..^ A- i^.+Pn , ^ 1 r , ^ ;-:i '_î _ at ^ 1.1 ^^'T . i , " ^^ a 5 1 7:, " -h n^

^'^ ^"'fr:'^kJ.^ v_. . ^. j r i ^^ 1 "i'" , I'. _ -, , t ..^'.I._ i^. - `.

D€., tact.a V "y Ci.12, . <. o, .D tl d that 1 i i k r i K

aw bea c.„"•C" t1_,i'. II; r"e`,:rvn E" ;,3g''= of what idppetl marijo .. I, .1_.{: .. .._ " '

iI3"f1h"'7' r^, _ a ,. . ^. :f b^" part Ca"t^ ^.i 'â' ^• :.Rqê

. '' iI.._. 0w!Y r:.tl^

f... °^

m^.i..W ^ 'r..k"^"'

:':ia ,what

a C: :3 t-k oT u w ' t '' ^ , ' ^ ' tl " I d n. TT2 at j y, 1 i k

t' .. ! ". . ' ' pIn at it Opp a be iCS r' of ' rv I . t an

c^, E^^ =1 :'i .. ,'.his "k.,^^_„^.i:l_I^' "_'^v^ not f^f M TTr"^ at 20, .:»o... ^ F' ?^. i î». , i,;` ±i iy I v"

rounds Ettderu found IC3 the ax""pu1'1 ==.".}l,. i ' is'$w j'It ' 1 :::'u

^ ^^'^"I y;"^fk„G'tlm the i"k,teapCin's 1aµ74;izWxTT2 at 46, r7r„; f"xa°"ra icw,..ar'âl» ^` T.I.. ' th at "^Vi^:,. L3 ti;.k;,^C,1('^ ;i..». Hi`tl:

rop.tci of mi I 9 ruwod-. T"i"' at 70-1: ffe fu: ttier te,_ ".,:i.f"a"e,^ that ign.:,..ficant blood

WES 71 - r i i ! i _ n"U „.:^ . TT2 at 4E.

1{En fc.. . °h ied that a:l.sn r c rwd wr":re x terrrt:-. of clothing from Mr. Tur.' ,

lMl,::ack µ'nd p°,.. C{ oVis, a piece oa' .,< ("'lab>CMc< a signi"?'Wi,, C.,leC ;I, and

0-Yete7w!„i 9mm spent ."hall "..»aw M nC7 TR 2 at 209, , i.1 .I !f. ' ,. Led tI6 „t

t ' w+hell w;d wasî.C.^ ^::.tJ:'§a located fi"tea„:,"' Mr. Turner, r:nd a lof^w^^:J i^^.C^:.3^C,^'I».e". J U,lua}.a 7„n o"= Ti„ir4nw'r1:''i

r^t^ty testifiedright hiC ndw 293, 2.:^1^ The officer 3.^^'9C5 recovered Mr. ^"l!:^ t.:^'t^.. ^nâ^^"IG-^ ^ vk "^;^

from hi^.^ observati^,:.rr'tl of t-a weapon that it appeared ta have jamred,. TT at 297M Al,.o

recovered was a baggy r .l f, I` ning a leafy green sub. tance, believed to ba m:c^risu.,:,na,

r'fecz'." d;1S±,. Pa:l"ker. T?» a`F° 233,

... tiva C"ulp'r'. nt further to^..^tif ~rat p"sice took , nt:t k<:,vi'-imncq p"t -n"m Pf broken^ . i

C recovered o n thi log od o 41 ^Vn...

V il t I<< ei , ---y 7l . 4 ^^G., u . . . n. tî

r G^ ^».G- ^^:tI.a Ax

r^ ^, "Y ^-^ kt,... g t ^ i:^ I 9 nt it' oi ^ ir,^ €^ d^ T ! . .» ! C i I h.>. ^..k,C' . C ,^. v^.?^.,.,

10

a'1'w 3E.^ ^

D*,w` #êctidFn F„,ul;..#art f"v rti.`"qEw±"' tE.!, tif1 ed th.:lthL? No, ViC,:,."t1,i I ii1g rcymot,r:

ha:o: ^ . rk rgni,,,, a :,mWW I.l b,appit of pilIN wto P. yered u M:F body. T"I`2 . t 31-2,

fi " fied S.,"hat Mi , r nor h d fa a^^:PiY Pir. Tura..iu' and ;t51 ,18"dd a c^^ll 7.aho3"..,:,:.

i v T`€" ^ ^ t 34,,

1 lw ^.ect^"^^r' C^^lp',"L . ^,, "in K n p ^ or 7 a l^'^^^ â^â sI:' nu„: ^

^.,. a ù""`^ I ^",'r^ F 9005110, 'lC..t i = ^ti,.i'' ",I .t ^'^'rî:.i ""&

;3, Y .„»fTY. to ..,,,.'I.. off Ec7rl S1 'K°t an 3,cò+0':1a ' r-i.k' . ;"i T.4'1lei;' v s.i e

. 4/Lhicle whici I tdey(."r"ectC'.d t" ha'slk:; }3ee"! "?nàAG,^nltded in t TT..., 45°6s 50^.

1. ;' teet'"s.i tipµin v ! . .. , ^'ae o'r^êrv®pd a w^',';s" i=^.^?ri`f.

Aerc 7 !ahi+ , 1=0 P c, A mc A n .-^ ^ n^ V un, T"^2 at 91, r w 1 ft ad

i . herC„ : I1,"aC! i . _i ! [ vign f „ _. nt 'ii _I "i ''.V blur,' l^ d "istmt,ie lora.. e . Ir:

^,i^" ""â ^îg=?" ^ r ^"if,^ roof of " i` V,Oc.^^ ^.^ cl?:^^;_ ^ : _ M;i°^: 51 y Kw^+â^9 _„. ,. âl ,

_.. e .._ , .r

cw^"1 =rY"€^"1 '!<.fle i.I'?.^^:^,iC^ .f r a^"Y "^ h.t ."a' I , !^;^^:^tC rîi:J.fp.C:C::I!^ ^.^'1e,^"^ the ^èEI . G,.vk..^d;^F^^ frf"'^F^^^ %.^'a^^.

a"" ^^^` t^"r,l `^ .^. ^. iC:? e ^t. ^.^^:xa^ ^2. ^c:5 G w '^:door, 7, T a.^. .., " F_^.} .: :^ ^•^ ,, , a+ `^^f^:G l,^t..,""'.; - f . .. ^. .. ^, ry!è^'+P,^'^: y ;'^ "^: A 1, ^ ^ .,.

a '^' ..'^^'^^ I °' f _,_TT

_7

, ..,7,7, , ,

"^.^.f^ R;.d!L^'1s ^#^J _ iy^^,; I ^^_ ,[:',.a=' l r' Irap C ^." .î.{

cj , ..I n, ;^. w, y^..,, :7:,. z; k- ^': t' ^:!'â'1,^1 C,^' "C.."^;a l. .^_"âtd,p„i,3'^ ... i", '^ ^",^._. I !' . ... ^. s. ^^Tcw ..â.:^,..,

l.i5-0

H£w testified that f:a.'ofii his ° 1 ai:"# o; î the'

1/eh:E.#,.,le, We caF"'go df,;or +"iad when l! lood w.A'`w W:. . .'l,... _, . 772 , 62` ... ,

Det,e,.,îve Gull.i _ fu {` . c , ° id the wutaf r.^^peared to ^`.ê blood was di„covered ^. a°i

the sI „er ne^. wf I ,-M . ..w , TT2 5W,

f.l fi'ir°wr " #, nWly & z of the T , . lic.. r, _ ntM f:' ist he € 9t to

". ^^,_ I â^â..^, . ^r m 1 f a'^ , M^c ! a hawp.t. t..3 raffthe , i ^ ^ pt)` ... o ;;:^C;

t, .,1ef1,,u`r,d d hTsy ci:.", .y a ,Calt3L,..,.c E",C6iu"^^f.... :.._ 7"Yri ;iro.'I?'.Ctils t'" "1. had

k..cov^.7rad I i MJ," " Tur69.:r.. TT2 "Y" 94,.,.5 i:,.,: st f,G.; j t1"kat i7!"r "t.rmnk.3 forr...,, the

r.„. .... ^C.. «...,f t.t"i . Uve CAl,.rdèau in "_.W:! il1 To„t^'sk`.qa, CT2 'a 95<;:3--

^- '_csi.a,w.t°iw' il" 1li i"i'i T. G^,. etz , of n "D I ^ - F&°... D4'"r.t a""i;,. I r;;"`p '.1.c

.. , i.l^'' .^,^, ^ ^,^"' r ^5a,^. ^, o n , ; -,yr ^^ '^ , ,i ^V1^,, r _ ^..^VG':

^..'i :' rf2r(rl ed by ^,îTJ L t. ,%" (,v yt"1 tF t 7 x?,. _ ry 3 '( s:. . 171 1 ., HF., r' _ et I i ^ i. . ' I:. . n `1e

,outDozy nd swr ,îl2".:'ctiC"g ^`;7'r!«..C e=:, , a1 'rl ^"s(nt °^^:^,^'. '^^"^^" tow lot to e;Kt:^^.;^',.;.._. , w.b.._Tf;, ., ' _ I ^" o'd '

e .: h i i:: FC:i C` d f i ,w. r F I hat. x. had I 4 ta11 ;;, f to r` k' fa;, f l1, t" ,yd . TT2 `"" 1:; im. He wasi, !. fisiJ

W , upon_"W -. . .^,. ,i ^^f ,^f?'", f"'.^"^^ I^r"af^ i,i:"P; _t,^ °^ V,.''.Y^^„!^"^,^' " , ^:; l I ,^P"^^.'ar Y.^' ^ v,^ e^:'^'k ^^ I..

41 iiiC'le for f.y » '^T at 104_,.5, {;e furknr B 'f.f."!.C` i I.,". a call ph -, Q., _^

i red from in; ;i.e i lh vehicle. TT2 _ ° 105. a. u o Goet; _ f.,nad that : p: , ,

aaip iflet4',il wi;ie ar,^"°;r;ou"e:C"ed from t1ki,w; '.^'.nt>.ri!;'`r of the ti.' hi',.,"ltw which ,_::1.' to "3:. 1 " c'i^^

out of th t metal of' tho ,êhicl^, by a pxojertile. TT2 at 114-5,

Da++;i,d Cc n of the Toledo Poice Crime L.ob f,^stif.:id that ai^ Sep tember 15, 2009, he

1 "t

.co1,°er1„Gi f,I"i fl Mr. P^-^r4;er^ TT2 ai:, 13w1wa:.. d^..^ to x a p;^'°^r"^w ,_. rQ' which waC ?a

He tea tl d ta 1.° t , ! ' om his q th G7 r'i."gj' 1 r ad to be c? 45 c. l?.iPem,

, .,^"7'2 -^. ^135. Hra .^°°,a^^.^.^':^..tr^ ^^r ^ .>"t^^p, thizu ^°^,+pr,^s e. ' ,I rr' ;^ 7 ., ^. ^'^;t^rurt..

^ly 'î^"f'^(, r,..._4 . t s ^1^1ea^^ t.^y the T"i'^, r ra^ €:^r1 { 6j' .". "rx ai3,1CP r 1" 4.

_, .e-^^ 1..m^ i _^ ^ i .^,,, .,

_.. ^'^rT" ''_`tr^ .^45 gr.,^,'â ^'^"2 ^t t^. tTE :^ a^ :.ay ^"wu<'.,^

1^ i2000r, r^,

1w!,. 9,

DrM ^ n`^h7a ^.yw î^:, ^.r 4w ^ a C^1 . }: ! „ C^.I^`n1""^"' . i Lucas County (.",^6;^""',^^` 's"^ ..» ^. ^ ^'" ^ a ` 1r^.i y '^' . ,...

Office tostitied that she p,.;;ri"o^^.:mw^d ^n nu ey of Arma on May 'C 2009 T2 st

1 6 rr. "^ ^' r ^. 4 .i5. ^`û^ Â t.f. `>^rt of Fêb i^'^td.P:il ^f.vs,t,».w1 WE^^. u^*.kr!i, 4î}"kc. I^ as^^..7^""#^: "^^ i'.5 i

d.. "^' ^, , ^ th at 4A ^ ' t .,.. d;^,.^,

ìt', int a IN;`, N "':!-x aP`€Ci Ja half inch g , Cy- p nm,..yw .,trr rt a. , . _ 'hFig ta:` `1C of,

- I i' i +:n! In t{'9i"r q,': ght ..: , tFl, i'"''. 'k ' t l tY,"i Is

., 0r, qt '. , lr;'?:ôsw^ the scal^. i 174; 7; Sil?i: ii_f'.,' " !

:,. -. JT y th,m? : hCtote7 would hG Ve face c auW In head when L ^'' I^^.ai

.f iar.'eLA u 1'"T2 at 167,

She ^^ st:r,fi."sC;:E that she C";I` r" not s1t l pplif'Eg or gt.9npoft'der :"es? °"ia Fk^;' at the wou9'"1d sit..,.

TT2 at 175. SF'?I:I N, i f h; P e ' ugnAF$"icance of the lack of ol"ratl .r,.:i. %C;d the,t

the gL.$a'1shol i_ Ii l, ti tiJ s not likmly made fa°om Cl, , TT, at 175,..

64 She "testif "' , I a: Dr°" classified th!: `Fd as i ^ 1 ^ f7r6M ak5

interrner°iiate r.. 7T2 75. Dr. !!e'..ssar tasatifi `"r°ha, t; h ^.': 10 tp^ cn;

ap};:srnxi.m.,at,ely th igt"7ts of aa°, 7nch in A4n°r:di.ntified person. TT3 at 94 _ .

I ,Co,, tev. A''. rt{JL,It.Js taken 0r1;e t1F,„J ..BaFix," .êng-wr c^'rgt"J d1t:;IC31"' .. 7"fa G'od''1s1ntef"t:..,

wt,t'h t . DNA af Mr. I..;r. 7T3 a°t; 95w Sh: c. uld not say how any or' f O' , cama to be

af i Y" c.kp4:;1n wi4` w (.;i the sr'...^1iri,.e wa."a n C 4r:!„ly from blood or I"i c her bodily

mat4 " a.;k. . T'C'3 "'^^^^^. 11_.

Proposition of l.ow No. I: THE TRIAL COURT ERi'ED WITH 13"S JURY 10t„UCTIF^NS WHERE IT

.'..''..,. .TED i'R„ BOr!E.ER'^ CONVIC1ÌONS F"OR Fk.1.,t.INY ''i'r ., f?i:GAi Dt.," ; i= 1"HtM. ANY CfJ' SIi.ÊR ^T<Ci:1N

., ,^L ', I ^T,, ITS (^ f^:L,^Bti,:^^°IO '` G^^"" '"' ^ r,^_la^^,^ l.t,„V^,.t.; '^-E L€:kiP"I^F^'^"t' ^ ^'I:.^„î ('I;^'!^" ,r^^.N^rîl^ :; ^'^ E`^+.1^,I^;^^^" :^^s ^;';1 , ^"?^ ?,

ASSAULT Al„.LL.GA1"10%

1`nit:Tally, tAhe ^.^vit'fei'iCF:.'; clearly w9rAâbli...hatii that ly p,r1.r^r tt.r !`€:r:,

firing the weapon that killeWd M1, k ri "r,,ery Mr. C`toC,iCer had 1?eP..,"3 rnbbed and ^.îstC$l IJhiR.a:) i

^.'1y :°.'11"6o of Mr, Park,t'r' aHiqa n.1.6w . nr:', that at the time of t h^." si"4o!! ' ng, Mr. r anKes:, iiwak

b";.eeding S',Jr ft I, f;r°o,.1 a f; 'i v 1 frwN sed caused by w11 t^"^.,^ s ^."

n-°`^.dmi. 7 s a'er^. !»:I €3y M:€." , s k„!rC`" r ; which 3--mr ''': i ix to ma,.i.7h' i, 740 a to G,.'losF?i!7

}»'. , i I', Ol^^â Clf.Warly a..:?.i'I _ .. C'"iru Tur: r and r. Parker a, : ,'^^ the van, ,:[f't

. ^' v ^.^ r and^ ' w^. • ^^ -^ ,„t.^,^' of the ...î^ . ^^Fa^^^^ ° 4::,w.^ xs^^,k^^,:^ ,^ ^^â^.^ k;â^, ^ ,^^.^.^^.N^^c^ ^, f •t^^ the (", r.._ 6. r ^ .^ L/an .

.. .. . ,,:. .

12

rxnd cc"en a'^7"c ir 1, from opp,.f?'. itr !,j ,,r^^ct? at', t I:, the driver t .1 side of th?LA.;,r'! x 1adhesl:* !'1a.r a

I:; it;?+id..w a- nho Y , ,'w. 4 i.K the d7îVhw,E' I s side dot' .' , a!ith W i

^r ty.^.,, I ^"ir, Ti.:t'°^9^,r :;rw of ^+ P.i'reî'f ^'iirw :'J 61 ^1;

^^" i^

this w1J.^denCie W: 1'„ ,,Vi 1 ,3i`:d that at t , 4u nhaAf'D } I. :. under

' ser ous px o'!,rr"o i':r " .. .' ,

The crux of . . ir tgle.F,"1". ,Jr' , the ! '? a€YY.w:.3"Ig of the jury ' "tatrui„ a°..4f`tn" ,

«or^tt 1'^ ^^^.^^."; ,1°,.a4"'i ti^...

„^. judge ^.' 1t ^ ^ . .

the ^ ,.`"^^. ,^^'^ . ...^^^''^C: of 6 . . jury ^.

,Mdel' I . x e nIs? as to I C!o rnm fz^lor7y f;'' ,he fj r7 ^^ H

+„^,:.,n.":^MF^4 :^r. ^ - : .,7 . t^'^ffà^ I ^. v ',,^l,.l I ^_l^l µw1f^.'^^.`.Ltr 6^^ I ' Ma >I y$, :^" 1 a^.^ F"I„„^,.P) ,,,

or : ^3 pT"o$1v,: ti."'" ri ew'r"f aiAd an f, y . ' i „^de:1T`l''ìng f any €,td1'xulh

A ... ^^ +^ the fourt ^ ^..^ ^:.. 'kn ^F{.^. lII:: ^»:^^rv ^^w.^ 7,y I"iw^+e:.r.. L "03n. 66:.3 G^ ^' ^W,:S^Ca^^'ex.a' W"b'^'' ...,. .n W1 . ... affen ., .,.:t'h

,.. «..11 .. Jk L .. ,

^ 1 ,:. :;"

.. il, ^

a:as: u^ . , cI+,a1 ry a7 1 i , . , I 1 J., I.^'i".^.n .s ^{@ k.G:, .d

'4 AIJ;!-..P ry

e . ^ I Ji u . .. .u , . ^ ' ^^^^' ^ ,. I. Y^ in ^1r«y1 ^ .

a'.. fr< Ona ;^;er t 1 il'' ii 't' prq;i x. me'te t iult i. t^Tt

r .I', I,! tti5"Ig ^,'^"^.f ^1a `: " 4f`.11 ,,.^fa { . felony "i, Yt ^:l^^' f1 ^" .,:i"^: 4^ G` I.

T, w ^ eform, Aggrev°.., :. ssault > . _;i f. , ° t con,v ic^': " t n for Felony

^ ^^ti ^ ^^f.In the :I„ p""1 l°wl l, e,"1 Y"T t w` *, f;„ry "°Y 22 p^. i q:'1 ^ ^.4^: ;ti.«, ..E1 j6 ^ r '^ 3"f .r' . _..f::x^'tw.» lJaâ ? thei' 1«! ^""

prior to the ji r,p ' r nCi F" ` , TT- at 4. Cr( " : f .:ic,w i. i 1,?'?" 1 tten i3 isty"11C: ,, :'. oI"'4M's wC.re nCi i^

e ^^ a^ d5 , , 0 . . all ', : W ° n ti ? ;JI^€.^ryP Ti .^^'^^'uc^M.^^rr^ „C^^^În C.`.harginC tno jury, the tS"°â! judge b^,xi, . ,"t with bc: i a !.na ut. !:fÌ § thsar..I turned to

the alemat4ts of 7: charge of murder,n The ^-.^.. ial jt9,a,c~. dw y„E tMre you C.,W firrd the,

d.,finr;aent gu:a:,x.tw, of murder, you must find beyond a i o I.ais doubt th'iat, r t or about

S: y4yx C4f Îayr, "^009f ; h".9 L'ic{'^'J i ^'J „1l f tyy M`} j.CR y fi' tt di:, r .w 47de?"lt I'::Iicl th..? fI [:iif

:Ai" `1':>ifi`1d Pi;l i kk'r as a p.i' oxw i :wl.i:lt of a;..

"a, i ".._ W! ^ folof,1 C9Ci"u; al m';':atl.^. "^". .r'' ^".^,S .!', ^^ ^'l^p t^" « ^Ê'1'

^"'^êr prav,'i-6^7 at1°Ie.T." dIw."1,niiiai'"IC:?9 stE:I h;:@'i the -lipph of f,':V .;l:,,ri.;C,;tr.t,ewll judge , .

assault are a+' follows: Ay kI . .'I.vgl'uf e 5 x cause; C, rious phy"iiit. ,,i ha?°'m" " TTF î 1W

The t1 ial ju C; hetn q^„Y' roc"„^..t i' ,d t'.e def,ikm1,.:3 th..: ri of th!-" (W,r' i."ff f ':.. : IpaS

cti wr'W;a al„lt u

.^.. ^ji.fk'^C3i^^'^^ ^''^â^':l":':1::t1.^Î^"' is that °^thte;^"F^ I^JC^,s^^^.'I to F::l.':^1"4:,^.^:4L.t.:aM.Lss1 h^^ w^4.i:, ,^ .^''^ ,' •^"Y`t't'f r the ^`

,',ss:ûlt the lesser included a^fen,, '''nprivatet P t.,a^t ^^'i^^ T F".t_^c.nl^:1, to ^.^^^' ^"

.^."

rrggl • 8

^+a.Vii'i.°w=^ ^^îacil.i:^.!',;y R.C. ;^î^^„^«^x CC'r"^4^°f.€`1:.C:',^ t'^ ^

^^""^';..lk::!'; « defining fr„oTl";.ou ?I.1lt y , « r.^ e"ii^±.3.r11 x eYI,: ^': 7! i i i.' i`:1.^ î.w.`f^gHfi.1:,61g

of serious pt oVa^t^...„ ..., , ..rt T^"Plr'":ay in r a trial ffÎ' °^^^.^,L.i I,T CL. ! 'i:; i^

defeyliniut3!t pres°kit'i ";uffi1 i1;?P"6t et/lCfe1"kCi:^^w' of êr, o.:l,:a p:C'oL+oc.ryM;l,,oi1, r-a,n 7;Y°l.''".Y'li."^. t.-1S`l *;Jr9

aggravated arcat.;lt .'1Z?st b}.. C.ilJmi to the ju%(°y. (R,,C« 2945,,-f4 e'1"iYa _".),"ic€.i'*'" 31 (C]

construed aC'"d 1ppliti-,d}i,

13

Emate v. Dêpi (1968)^ 40 ^hic, ROC 205, 533 CC^^ ^^^^ paragraph four of the

sylâbus. Apgravat^^ ^^âult is r: felony of the fourth degr:e¢ nO 2903w1 2(8) .

SuffiLS v':^^ avirênce of z;^ .x ^cus provocation was pre. ";'_ ( in Mr. Booker'^ trial and

an 00z.,u ' : ni on aggr:^^ât^ ^ assault should have been gi:an. How-r=er; the trial judge

s'id no~ .Q the ^^ to the lesser I^cluded offer^^^ ef a_orated Pa^ûlt n^:^r

dincu.,: - mitl~ g element of "ma:r.ious provocation" I€^ hoc; ; :: ^,^f the

ury.fa lYi.nL aa^âults Therefore, the trial court arred.

of providing an instruction as to age re- ,^ôul^, thu^ _ri :. u ji. !ge

proceeded to l^^truct the juryF "if you find the State prav, ^^ beyond a re`. .' i.' - ^

alI,. . the essential slements o" the offense of mu*^^âr, +^2ur v^^dic:t

rn;.xÂ.QTTS at ^^ (v^°hasis _ A

^. ^^. 1 ` t, l Judge K i i^sta°ucid °^ ^ry with -i- : ^ ^ ^ê firearm p^^^ficationry

^^ ^ên ^.^? G?vi ^ . o r^ as to the rarge for '^he all- : . of murder, a ' g: 'u^ ^ you

find that the ^^âte ^rovad beyond a reasonable doubt C,^ the ^^senti '. elements of

murder, err` that the defendant failed to prove the defense rf ôlf«dofmnseb which will

h:' dt*firu: r' la .:rr by a preponderance of ti"ie: evidence, ^ '" find ::rntw..a ....^....,,,^„

of a37u$"de^' II T5 A 20 (emphasis_ »_ .,.,..u. -,.-a^ . ...u.:e... . ..« ,. .wr+v . . , .

hFffrz . _.. .r..'r.3afol_,w:'^?.or^, °^'!ê ^"„^î^{^,. ,^$f^''- ^.^.^d, e^'ôu ''^ on!.., cunalliz. bw.e«»*a...wwa

off,, qpe nf if yOU firtd th; u1j.tv'=^ ^" e': °î P^; ;, ,î^^.M .. u ^.^ ..^ ,,.^.^

T"^^ trial Jug " , t'sen praceededx after a rrisn stater^^^^ , to instruct ths ,;ur, y that if

they found that he defendant proved êlf-d, , _ s, , that they must return a verdict of

not guilty ane3 were not to consider the fi7e,-7m speu:^ficat:1nn or the lesser inclu^^^^

offense of voluntary manslaughtex,. TO at 21<

The trial judge then turned to the is.,ue of voluntary rtar^^slaughterg instructing the

jury thet if the State fells^^ to prove all of the element of Felony Murder and the

Defendant failed to prove the ^^^^^se of self«dafenwe, or all jurors could not agree,

ti^^^ the jury was to consider whether the State had proved beyond a reasonable doubt

that ^^^. Bc^^^^r was guilty of voluntax°y mans?acaghtaT arzr.i its attendant firearFr!

;pecification. TTa at 21--2.. The trial judge thur^ provided the jury with t^^ ele^^nt of

vs^luntarll manslaughêr, tT^ at 22-6, In thte <.nst;^^ct, the tria1, judge provided the

definition af ser:^^^^ provoeation< TO at 25.

The trial ,judg^ then sdmoniBhed the jurV as to their duty tc) acr°;:,,pt the law as

given by the trial court and make 1,tz findings uninfluenced bj,€ a.t^:=: posa^^ to find a

^+ ^° .^^-C. , °^, The trial judge .^;Fêâ gave theincluded 5^^F Î'k•^'a^. ^^^ ' 3 ar ^s e iur4d en ins'p'rliC.' .. i""1n

regarding ^^lf-deferrse. TO at 29^3V Next, a problem with the ;.r^str^^tione was

discovered and corrected during the instruction .êgardir°rg self-deferssee T^S at 32,..4.

14

The i : Ia1 jeacJc, , k Ingt-ro^^d the jury with ror^grd to the charge of r-arrvircg a

cu r° wmpcn. ^ thmn ,_ . . coraclumary inatrt.tct%ost s

.zes the trig' court instructed the jury that if it: foundx ^ ,yond A

^s` I daubt, that Mr. Booker ca¢seec the death of Mr. Parker as the

:cen;.^lt t^^ ^^ôwingly agusing ser^^^^ physiâl #^^rm, either to Mar. Parker or Mr. Tu.n : ,

it had to fJid MrN Er ak-^^ ûilty of Felony Murder, unless Mr. Booker proved the ^ ef,.,,,^^

of T J-da.' a by a preponderance of the evidence. This is not an accurate at-4v^^^nt

of r; .. t W: i °? State needed ti3 mve# ^s It lef '°4: i t: an in& a ruction as to

al , :,J uffs^nse ^'^f ^^^rrv qssault, w:i tfi? - râx"`re" mmitigating ale :. nts of

" m: .cus provoo. n.1,

4.ot s:.irf.3ris,"^ngly, following the trial judges inaccurate i$"fstrr.;ats , returned a

v,. rd .. t ;af guilty as to the ^harges o^^° Felt^^y Murder arsd the firearm sp. .ifIcati=

Tnerefo:^^ ^ ^^ the trial coura 70 4 to in^ ^ru^^ the jury us to the lesser included

offense w3f Aggravated Aseaul`^, P';i'i; IncVdas the mitigating factor of 3se.;io1,Es

provocata.on, " in ~ a context of ltu s^liêzc i , po ; of the undarlying felony of Fe1 sious

Assault ^^^ an -s. il of the cha^.^g^. of Felony Murd^^^^ the k ;dict must be van i nd

the ra°#:,°^^r ram;^^^^^^ to the trial court for further proceeQ: ; .

HaP< .^31 .^ît^^ of Law flu.. 11: THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN DEN"s'I('aG M^^;. BOOKER'S MOTION rOR

ACqUITTAL €A'H:..;Ê THE STATE rAILED TO ^PCaEN"i" SUF"FICICR3 Et^^DE^Ê TO SUSTAIN A CUNV.T.CTION

(TT4 cS'^ 2B 30; TT4 at 139^ 40)

IneC.$f'3icien« ;^.'Vie.. .:. wes k;,;^^"...sented to support Mr. Bo'`^ke^,:`s ",_ s,.c.t:£, to ^!'.^,.,"['!iiV

Specifically, the aw.: ^. _r _. did noto support a finding of the element of felony ,.u.. ,..< r,

that tseing r:it Mr. Booker ômnr itted Felonious ^ssûlt, where i€asuffiîent eva,dence was

^^^^^^^^^ ^ ^ B=07 ^^^ ^^ acting under serious pto+ôc^^ ^^^ , thue reducing any

assault to ."'.ggx•avated a ,ls;4 Again, Aggravatad Assault§ being a felony of the fou^^^

degree, cannot support a conviction for felony Murder.

^rirn&^290^ motions for ;^cqu,^ ^ âl test the suff1cienty of the evidence presented

at trial. State v. ^mphriesq Ross App. Noa 02CA2662, 200: ^^^ô-599: at 76, citing State

v. Williams, 74 Ohio St 3d 569, 576, 1996µGhic-e91, 660 N.^.2d 724; an^.^ State v. Miley

(1996), 114 ^hio App. 3d 73S, 742, 684 ILE.2d # 02® The triel, court mrs^^ enter a

judgement of acquittal when the State's evidence Is I^^ûfficient ar^ a matter of law to

sustain as conviction, i;rim <4^90) .,

When reviewing the ûfficiwncy of the evi^^^ce to support a criminal conviction, an

appellate court's function "is to examine the evidence admitted at trial to ^^tarmir:e

whether such evidence, if believed, would ^^^vince the average mind of the de;endant's

r x,m . ...a..., ^ ^^.guilt beyond a reaso^=âb:^..e da^âbt. ^t .^ta .w .^.. ^,f . •et^Ê ^., ( 1 991), 61^°^ ^^h^,ou. 5^.^ ^ ^r ^^^ , 574 N. ^ - ^'i

492, at paragraph twrj af syllel^^^^ (superseded by state constitutional ic4ent coa^

other grounds),

15

f, - x " -n j^.$r^^c..n;„€ v. `.^;^;^*i !.^^Jti,:^^ ('^.. ^'7'.^);r +^43 l.i. S,,, :â°a7:, 99 sw ^; ^^ . 2781 , r^1 €., _ x:f,'^^! 5604^ - , .

. :!aJ "!t .Gziqulry S„E"r Wlhuy, f er viewing the .'vid„nce in t;'"i light Vfl"'w4 si., fa^:?1fo,C"ab u..

t pro. .itioP1r a:'' !. of fa:fct ^::ok":Il'.:JI hov«' found ,u"m 1w,'2`"7al !~•„: me+m,,^±

. ; .4'^,'Yf ,.;C.. preJvi:"YJ ^ nd r` ale doub;, Ir.. The .,"id°,r,[,t: 1 ..

!r,

El ! _ ,w1nc. r"VP2A D C.2sl' . iin of loL.J . ,#"Yi" J 'v D.. «°(rEit LR:, W ._ .

.71.a3^., i ^J < , .. « .E .. {lls ^ "^^".Jî (J^9^P« , ^'^, r3C^ 83, 2C^k`-! ,1 S',_'Iy ^:i,f^F^^ I^J.M waîr^ 1^P..1^^y r°J°^ ^;^^xy .I"Ef^.^.

^ ,,t ^, * ^...^,e^ ("fk^^.ti ), 20 C^^°!:â, A(^3^ H ;^r^ "^ ^'1, 175, â-85 P,F.. ^, ^.'d ` °( 7 ::..^^::^

^ a^ J"t ^ ^j Ti.:"J Mr. ^,^1"^,>^^ ^±in e8t "^;k''."?l,1"+co Y.C','^c „r tt^.i"^ 3 i !"k ^ i ,,i. wa raj,,t.^1, p7. 45J

w ` ! .i A , I .i g ble.°d.ng f*9 C'!E f l'" _. C: u4,". ed :7y the j l Wpp1!, ,.

.,"^, .._ _, ,` ^^ ! 1Ê.d;". ^'ui^,tI " _ ^ ^ ,.,,. !r

! i'! ^"1îQ ! '! t ! C^ ^^.I^.^^ _..7^t ". ^ ! ,^. _.

!i „I"fY,.,

^",J?"î!;^"r9^ , 1 F ^W f,tth'{.ppingY M`?;« PsY V , n,. Tua2" 1

-

... . .,

. ^ §f ,e w r ^,ti:î"âthe ^^`...^:. " V"$î.: i^.L^,;.^,f^''.^{ ^^ i..i-ta^ of the JZ,9.. ,,: I ,. "I t.. i , ^"

c r ad {:v,k th{roTE'J^, ._id:.. of Lri"M[ A/u.dJ"`c nd ii:'a°, Turner, Ci,f:[..::j"i ., ,.w fr

Bruf ,jr of Tho vriT"e w U Ee i' "rJcY.;; Jw,ff th rî fi+3 t" "..Jg by f sde., ad'1a-

I,", i T, .. Athat M:J"."v _ x wee under ", ... t"" pro," ir: .. ii t!I E ^l.J1 ,inLf

rsi^.-:cu u Inare then war

Th kJ,.'^:.e, the trial cCef..ilr "^rred in G(eJ"EyiC"ff: M.C"m Bi:,7f„tkC'r1!' CI i for r„Jcq. I.tll T"e

P E fe1ilta'O t+..x p:a"i -t s.JffiL.iaR"i.p, wv;d.tipfJC. r a'; to the 1 , . of F

i "r;."%,l C" 1Ltes ." ih ;E .t of u tY^ , q"tr fr" I f tt.G,.ng t,he f"if reti:^

f n,', _ ,.... .-" o ,. , l , . ^^ ^; ^^; 4- rFfd q W^ P .^ I ,^r, 1 r d e ,, ...^-,.. _. , ,_

, ' ^! 4"^ ^"'' ., , . .. ^"

c Ic .. ':;M ow,t r her,..f ^. re be v c- . _ sd the rr I r arnm' ar ^ ^ comq "br,

! ._.:. ry: he.w J•".7 T :; i e!^^wt t iJ"d gs.

+ r I,!^Î ^ ^/ Ir. F.,J't Î^'.^ ...^.: ^'Vµ r^l ^^'° hn. ...^ .I":".,.f`J,''+!1.^^"Iri^`9 y the trial cG:.'^ ^f,â. la er red t^°6"i'.^ .I.:,4.^ ,^"^"g:.;+.T i ''„'"rM,,^.^+ kY:!"+1^" .. N „ ...

'! . t is d"1CJ T, , '.:dppr3r'a`„!ed ' ,yJy n "f1„I.. «,.t,:rfi7'i" i.11/ a:,X. ...ric`; t71 .i :. M"i:",. Bi,t:'tkG. t. I.I id not G,a»1ff:I.ci„ nW'^ y

p.'.!vWry '.,elf 4(.rf,n::;.' by a p,. mi c' ics of thc ,videnco>

The ak f.#rIl} t1w i o'. n? Lf°deY ,,a.... coi1 .aik1.. th, ,. e B': W The defendant t"i'J&. K

,l7 ;.".;".111 l.. t h El W -, a !. ', +" mat@ Y"f g he ,. 2 t:..I w hat pL` ,. w t, e "'GCJ

i ;} i"'; l`, ; (2) hc"9a d ... W"J S°! Y."'+ f.:, 4"a Wx}i P" i i ^:"6.. Er,! a..l u. ,^ ^" i i3 i ! I' 'E V3 T":

v 4iW.'• t^ r^'i Y'^ LP. il..i I .._ _.. ..... .^Î • ,. ._

r ,^..

2 ' ''T^ ^ ."I . . "t " 39ifi 9:''P"rc."^ i' ^.,^^ ^ v.êl w.^ ry ..^ s i, ti?^ L^"^{ ^:^ C t : .

r :'1'"^ "^4 `tl,^." cy.^ ^ll+:^^t.. .:,a.,

b^.f 3 ^..L. .

^ ^ ^^'^^'J^: ^t. 1 ...i.!^.f^^^.^,;_, ("^f"^9t._!) , 4^,ivi "i." l ^ n '" _Vf.: 3,k.» th e ^ ,.^, w^^Y^.{c^ . c: ^^:^ _^ : any i..' ^.1 ^:^ tw:l

E I.p'@i°J v, ti:>^'«- ,

u 2 4 . i u"^ r^r it ^ ;'- ( 1179) ,`,, 8 ^ , F^: S"^; „, A ; `7e^.§ T I ,_ i!"" f^lE"J

'^, e.'^€-', w^.:^. ' .^r ; ^ ^.

qof the s4^.d,k.::af.^F3..,. ^'3^,n^..^".a.iln+F''g:. ;Î .^.. 4;8 duty 'j^. J.. ...^''^", "F. , ,. ^.!,i.: y ^w!I^ _ ... r ^..tî `,^"^î ^'î,I

lethalal Iorcem I t.;l. at f 250

Th;.. 7 1,rsCx pI."',:JnC{ If th 3";obbin'i tes'!; f:3"':T.' a2elf "^'I. f .,.thr: t A&.* d4!'f..W I w,'_a €I i;l";

fault i n c I ; ; ? a t . , ! ' ` » j ! . . 1 . , `r1. C.ua: 5on giving .as;w to the r . , ' w . ,:`!Y<;I- s ?'7ot t ei C ° . :f : i . j

tht? the dW?f:=.k1IJ,Ja€$t layed P ."I ^''s,. t in it. i'"Cf. th:'.,r 4iCqes it preclude t'h.., dii?fe M:i ...a h.;9

defeI dei nd , ! ul "3 :.. ei" i1"1 cr1;, m1,' 1 a.^^::, c!." 1"'I "'J l1 f " t i..^t h,. n '"1 e W ,.1 '.. .1 tt ;:i cked. State kt ,. Tr,l , 171

1 r

Ohio App.3d 82, 869 N4 E^ 2d 708. Rather, it ^^qLsi^^^ a êfendant to show ttiat he was s°lat

"at âu^t"° in creating the ^^tuatior^^ ^hs-t is, that h^ âcl rit ent, rni.r` in such wrongful

conduct toward his assailant that the assailant was pra^.. ^tt.,_,ck -the cêfe-l:_fen°^.

H^ra,,, although ^^ . B^^^^r was a,,^-°°rrmpti^^ to purehc^si, marijuans, no evi. was

pssse=;tr;. that h-P was at fault at cr :> ^. ig the violent situation that resu1^^^ in Mr.

Pax ker' ., It wes Mr< TL,: ner whr robbed and pistol whip; 3ed Mrn Booker and Mr.

Parker : "^^^ Turner who c to exit the van on the pe.,, r:tr,.:r side of the êhi^^^

and circle around, from opposii , directions, to the driver's sV^m, of the vehicle where

Mr. Booker i.^se standing.

Further, Mr. Booker had a b-. -, _ fi^.ie belief that hp was in imminen't danger of death

or great bodily harmP He had, J.. ct,.C:°,ely prior to the shooting, been subjected to a

threat of great bodily harm by Mr. °C'ur. r,,iz placing a gun to the side or side of Iiis head

arad suffered at least bodilV harm when Pir« Turner pi^ôl whipped him. Mr. ôoker was

cl^^^^ ^ swere that Mr. Turner possessed a weapon when he exited the van ara the

p, , , w^ side and transited around the back of the van to the driver's sia^^ before the

began. Mr. Booker reasonably also had a borâ fide belief that Mr. Parker, who

îmui,taneous to Mr. Turner' s "move, " hooked around ttie front of -the van, pose an

im; ,s., ent danger of death or great bodily harm to h.aTnk Mr. Booker, who was outside of

the van by the driv^^ side door, as Mr. Turner and Mr. Parker performed what could be

described ^^ a pincer movemar^t further established that he believed ttiat the u5e o^^'

foTce was his only means of escape, as he was ou^side of the van, Mr. Parker 4ses at °tpê

front of the van and Mr. Turner was at the back of the van, with his handgun.

fi inally, Mr. Booker did not violate any duty -to retreat or avoid the danger. He had

exited the van on the opposite side from where his assailants exited, putting the ven

between himself and them. However, as Mr. âr^^^t put it, Mr. Parker and Mr. Turner

"made their move," with Mr. Parker hooking around from the passenger side of the van to

-the rear driver's side of the van, Mr. Booker's path of escape was blocked, with Mr.

Parker, apparently, controlling the area in front of the van and Mr. Turner controlling

the area behind the van and Mr. Booker caught outside of the van.

Therefore, the trial court erred and the verdict is not supported by sufficient

evidence where the evidence did In fact establish, by a preponderance of the evidence,

that Mra Booker acted in se1f-defense. The verdict must therefore be vacated and the

matter remanded to the trial court for ^ finding of acquittal or further proceedings.

P^^^^^siti€^^ of L,^ No. IZZ: MR= BOOKER'S CON41IC3°IIIN POR FELONY MURDER AND THE

ATTENDANT FIREARM SPECIFICATION WAS AGAINST THE MANIFEST WEIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE<

rfAlthoiagFa a court of appeals may r#etermirts that a judgement of a trial court is

ss^^tairted buy sufficient evidence, 'that court may nevertheless conclude that thp-

17

VA .. €°nt .^^ ^gair^^^ the wei^^^ of the ^^v i &_.me^ State u. Thos^^kLns, ;'?" Ohlo.Stm 3d

H0a 387, 1 99'7-Ôhim-92a 678 N, E# 2d 541, in l, t- " F ir^^ whether a criminel c „:. ^^^^^n is

against the rr:ani^^^t wefgI^^ of the evidence, .: appellate court must revi=;=:r the entire

record, - 10 the etîder^^^ and all ressor^^bla Inferencess ônefêr the credib^lity of

witnessai and determine whether, in r^âlving conflicts in the evidenc«, the trier of

fact clearly lost its v 2 x nd created such a m^ni^^^t micerri^^^ of justice fr,at . ; :,

conviction must be ravai ^ xeda Id., citing P^^^tira^ supra, 'it 175A A revêwing c;:,_;, t "i ,,

not reverse a eonvic•^^^...s^n when there is substantial evidence upon which the tr:âl COL- t

could reasonably conclude that all elements of the offense have beer^ proved beyond ^

reasonable doubt a " ;a ^^ê v. Johnsor^ (1991), 56 O' ° : - St.3d 40, 567 N, &2d 26^. , cit' nty

State v. Esir.,Î: . : (1988), 38 Ohio St.3r 56, 525 N& 0d 304, at peragr^.^ph two of -m

^yllabus,

Even i^ acting es a th °^ juror the weight to be given avid . I asic^ the

credibility to be afforded tes_ ry;:.o€^^^ ^ê issues to be determined by the t inr of fact.

= v. Frazier, 73 C3hic.St.3d 323, 339, 1995-Ohic-235, 652 N.E.2d 1000, citing State

v. t- -. !, 57 Ohio.St.3d 465, 477, °! 99s-Chic-17"^ ^ 620 Na Ea 2d "0. The `".. .' i` f0der "is

best _ la to view the witnesses and ^^êrv^ the t n - n, , u u:es; and voice

inflections, and use these _. . rvatior^s In weighing th : eedlbilV ` of the proffered

ter^timony u ^^ Seasons Coal ^^ ^ V. Cleveland (1984), 10 0hia . ^^3d 77, 80, 461 N.. E< 2d 1273.

Thus, we will only interfere If the fact finder clearly lost its way and created a

manifest miscarriage of ju^tice.

With regard to the conviction of Felony Murder, should this ratiz°t find that the

jury was not lead astray by the trial ôurt¢s jury lrasiructiorcs, the jury clearly lost

its t=iay in finding ttiat Mr^ Booker°s actions cansf. .: a taC Felonious Asse°.;lt where, as

demonstrated above, ê w^^ acting under serious prro^^êtion, thereby, at waree

constituting the offense of Ag3ravoteei Assault, Eq erimp. which will Mt S;.tt^^^^^ 0

finding of Felony Murder.

w urthe.^ , with regard tti the jE.ary' s failure to find that Mr. Booker proved, by a

preponderance of the evidence, the d€µfer^^^ of êl^^defes^se, the jtirya as discussed

above clearly lost its way,

Therefore, Mr. Bookerrs conviction must be vacated ^^^ the matter ^^manr;e^,^ to the

trial court for further p^^^^^îngsv..

CONGLUÎON

The jury instructions provided to Mr. Booker's jury were seriously flawed where the

trial court instructed the jury that It must find Mrt Booker guilty of Felony Murder if

it found ttê 't hp, ttad ^^^^^^ the dreath of Mr . Parker while knouing1.y e^^^sirag serious

p^^^sic^^ harm to either Mr. Parker or Mr. turner, witho=.^t regard to whether Mr. Booker

16

41 : e f ting C aer.j.^'Ju „ _ c 1n, o : _ i l;7ret further mrl d in d, °I "s'1g Mr.

'ii,:W. . 'i 1I^;i^. "^t,r W ^^ ,î i z- ^.r 1 ^"^". NA"I acteV,.^`^:^ ^^}^^.iai ^ ^^^'i ^,!'^''Î; ',^r^_, ^^^^d- ,

unEar ser:€ o ^ ,,,tJn,. ln K_ 51 _r 1. A'r lem' l k W F,` n .su:,, Llt whw,ch s.^rved

ast^ e w c... 0 "Y,, r d ' r ,'.;+ ck.°:I.'1 V e :', oC'i f: r fs.^ loa Y _; I.. i r v ?c.

I- t;a iat, cuur'rT also er^^d whert', in k.ênyY1°€r7 M4 x ::.r 'r1i: moEion ^^';wtr acq I wfêre!

W. ik',K t3 3.^r

4t d ou11w r"b I

1a, k

â df^f e^k r t d f r^^^w l f"r"' * Irew.r:a^^.^,.!"L dj'. t ^;m+ ^ ^' „R+1_'1 ^ .

FIr . °^ 's v._ _;._;.^.. ,: rit w^^.^^ .^t^-^^fi by ^^^.^^'^'.^. ti:. ^ ,^ ' ^w . ^ t^^^ r

',^^G,' i'14^' LV t w i i r F "a::he ek! r': „

T r.'i :re, b;rW Hacker's eNI ,t.+'' ion r'c^r fF . fnHar and .w,, -1w^l

a}tef»if,.w' . ' i.''1 N'kBut:o^ be 4Yrc.d t ild a9'id " h. _';u.Ette1' :. _ f _ further ,`1. fgd R.

Respracf`fully hAd;

1..or,ir^ ^^ rrem, an InstW

2075 S. Avon"" l1 ,n 1"t &

Gru t''ân Ohio, 44044

pro sox

19

Cc*RTTr1CPTE xor gFt-l"Tr^P

h`=:i^Ct?î'^^^l^f°i IN SUPPORT1 Dej&,Ea^3 Boc^.''1"y ^"ttrl^.",^^'^d ci^:C"".1^^ti;r ^ ^ tN^^V ^' I..

OF JlJRSSiÎC^"!Cq' OF APPELLANT kÊJ ►.^^1N x3^;!^K.R, w- x.^ u û ^^.1: The

L^ca^ County Prosecutor, Courthouse, 700 Adams St . , Toledo, Ohin, 43624, ot

^. iay a-F Ffi i ir , 2013.

Ct f l.C11

x.:

D4eh ôokes,

2075 ".soutî Avri',^' I i tcar':^

Gr4 S r.ron, i:lhio, 44044

F i,^ ED

^ ^RK Of CO'UR^SCL

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIOSIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

LUCASCOUNTY

State of Ohio

Appellee

V.

Dejuan Booker

Court of Appeals No. L-10-1140

Trial Court No. CR0200902310

DECISION AND JUDGMENT

Appellant Decided: January 11, 2013

Julia R. Bates, Lucas County Prosecuting Attorney, and

David F. Cooper, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.

Stephen D. Long, for appellant.

YARBROUGH, J.

1. INTRODUCTION

{¶ 1} This is an appeal from a judgment of the Lucas County Court of Common

Pleas in which a jury found appellant, Dejuan Booker, guilty of felony murder, an

unclassified felony in violation of R.C. 2903.02(B) and 2929.02, and the attached firearm

EiOURNA112EDJan i 1ron

1.

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIOSIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

LUCASCOUNTY

State of Ohio

Appellee

Court of Appeals No. L-10-1140

Trial Court No. CR0200902310

V.

Dejuan Booker DECISION AND JUDGMENT

Appellant Decided: January 11, 2013

*^:^x*

Julia R. Bates, Lucas County Prosecuting Attorney, andDavid F. Cooper, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee.

Stephen D. Long, for appellant.

YARBROUGH, J.

1. INTRODUCTION

{¶ 1} This is an appeal from a judgment of the Lucas County Court of Common

Pleas in which a jury found appellant, Dejuan Booker, guilty of felony murder, an

unclassified felony in violation of R.C. 2903.02(B) and 2929.02, and the attached firearm

1.

specification in violation of R.C. 2941.145. Appellant was sentenced to serve a prison

term of 15 years to life for the felony murder charge in addition to a mandatory and

consecutive term of three years for the firearm specification, for an aggregate term of 18

years to life.

Facts and Procedural Background

{¶ 2} On May 1, 2009, appellant shot and killed Armond Parker ("Parker") and

shot Markees Turner ("Turner") following a marijuana sale which abruptly ended when

Turner "pistol whipped" and robbed appellant at gunpoint.

{¶ 3} On the evening of Parker's death, the record reflects that Parker, Turner, and

Kevin Garrett ("Garrett") were at two separate apartments in the Elmdale Court

Apartments. Parker and Garrett were at Garrett's sister's apartment drinking alcohol and

Garrett additionally smoked marijuana. Turner was in an apartment rented by two

females. He was also drinking alcohol and smoking marijuana. At some point in the

evening, Turner, Parker, and Garrett encountered each other in a park connected to the

Elmdale Court Apartments. The three eventually headed to a convenience store located

on the corner of Elmdale and Airport Highway to purchase cigars, drinks, and cigarettes.

At the time, Garrett possessed 14 grams of marijuana and a scale on his person.

Furthermore, unbeknownst to Garrett and Parker, Turner was carrying a 9 millimeter

Jennings handgun in his waistband under his shirt.

{¶ 4} At approximately 11:30 p.m., appellant, in his mother's white Ford Aerostar

van, stopped to get gas at the same convenience store that Garrett, Parker, and Turner

2.

.... ... ^ . . ... . .. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. ^ . . . . . . .. _ . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . ...

were patronizing. Prior to entering the convenience store, Garrett approached appellant

and indicated that he had marijuana for sale. Appellant indicated his interest in

purchasing marijuana, and the two agreed to continue their discussion once Garrett made

his purchases in the convenience store. From this point, appellant, Garrett, and Turner's

testimony diverged.

{¶ 5} While in the store, Garrett's testimony was that Turner informed Garrett of

Turner's intention to rob appellant. Garrett requested that Turner not rob appellant, and

did not take Turner seriously. Turner's testimony was that this conversation never

occurred.

{¶ 61 Upon exiting the store, Garrett, Parker, and Turner entered appellant's

vehicle. Garrett sat in the passenger's seat next to appellant. Turner sat directly behind

appellant, and Parker sat beside Turner. Garrett's testimony was that he intended to

complete the drug transaction at the Elmdale Court Apartments, while Turner testified

that he believed that appellant was just giving the three a ride back to the apartments.

Appellant testified that it was his preference to complete the drug sale at the convenience

store.

{¶ 7) On the way back, appellant missed the road leading to the apartments, so he

completed a U-turn at the corner of Mercer and Williamsville streets. At that point, one

of the occupants indicated that the three could be let out at that location. Appellant

pulled his vehicle over, turned off the lights, but left his vehicle running. Garrett and

appellant then began negotiations for the marijuana sale. Appellant testified that the

3.

marijuana did not meet his quality standards, and therefore he informed Garrett that he

was no longer interested in purchasing the marijuana.

{¶ 8} Turner testified that at that point, he decided to rob appellant. Turner

pointed a gun at appellant and ordered him to turn over his property. Appellant resisted

turning over his property. Testimony reveals that Turner "pistol whipped" appellant on

the side of his forehead around his eye. Appellant then held out his money, marijuana,

and cell phone for Turner to take. Turner ordered appellant to unlock the doors.

{¶ 9} The testimony of the three further deviates at this point. Appellant's version

is as follows. Appellant observed that Garrett had a large gun on his lap, and appellant

tried to grab the gun, at which point a struggle ensued. After gaining control of the gun,

appellant exited the vehicle from the driver's side door. Appellant claims that Garrett

alerted the others that appellant took his gun, Garrett then fled the scene, while Parker ran

toward the front of the van. Appellant shot Parker not knowing whether he was armed,

and began returning fire he believed was coming from Turner at the rear side of the van.

Appellant testified that he fired a total of three or four shots and that the same number of

shots were fired at him.

{¶ 10} Garrett testified that he exited the vehicle after Turner robbed appellant.

Garrett opened the cargo door and saw Parker and Turner exit appellant's van. Garrett

then turned to head towards Airport Highway, and heard a gunshot. As he began

running, Garrett saw Turner run behind the van with a gun in his hand and his arm

extended. Garrett heard a second shot, and then saw Turner fall down. Garrett testified

4.

... .^_. . _ ...... ......... . . ... ... .. .. ... .. . . .. ... . .. . . .. . .. . . . . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .... .... .. . . . . . ... . . ....... ..._...

that he did not see Parker. Garrett managed to flee the scene, heading down

Williamsville to a dead end. Garrett returned to the scene twice-once prior to the police

arriving, and once after the police arrived. While speaking to the police, Garrett

indicated that his brother-in-law, Parker, went to a convenience store, but had not

returned. Garrett then returned to the Elmdale Court Apartments, but was stopped by the

police as he fit the description of the suspect as indicated by a witness. Eventually,

Garrett told the police his version of the events that occurred, and pointed out appellant as

the shooter from a photo lineup.

{¶ 11} Turner testified that upon exiting the vehicle, he intended to return to the

Elmdale Court Apartments. As he cleared the rear of the van, he heard two gunshots, felt

that he had been hit, so he drew his gun and fired toward the driver's side of the van.

Turner was able to fire three shots before his gun jammed. While Turner did not see

Garrett, he saw Parker on the ground with a shot in his head. After he was shot, Turner

tried to walk to get help, but collapsed near Parker and lost consciousness.

{¶ 12} Appellant then fled the scene in his van, and went to visit a friend at the

Weiler Homes in Toledo. Appellant threw the gun out of the van after turning onto

Airport Highway because he was on probation in the federal court system and was

prohibited from possessing firearms. Upon arriving at the Weiler Homes, appellant

backed into a parking space and parked his vehicle, which had the back window shattered

and mostly missing. Appellant then went with his friend to St. Charles Hospital where he

received six to eight stiches to close the wound on his head caused by Turner. Appellant

5.

. • _

told the hospital that he had been hit by an ashtray to avoid disclosing that he was robbed

while trying to purchase marijuana-also prohibited under appellant's probation. The

next day, after learning that someone had been killed during the shootout, and seeing his

picture on the news, appellant decided to flee to Columbus until his family had enough

money to hire an attorney. While he was in Columbus, U.S. Marshals tracked down and

arrested appellant. He was then returned to Toledo.

{¶ 13} Evidence found at the scene included a jammed 9mm Jennings handgun,

which contained DNA from Turner, Parker, and an unknown third person. Furthermore,

the projectile that was removed from Turner was determined to be .45 caliber, possibly

fired from one of the following guns: a Ruger.45 caliber, a Llrna.45, or an "Auto-

Ordinance Thompson .45 submachine gun" [sic]. Blood collected from the driver's side

door handle, the exterior of the van behind the driver's side door, and the steering wheel

was consistent with appellant's DNA. Furthermore, a cell phone found at the scene

contained DNA consistent with that of appellant.

{¶ 14} The deputy coroner testified that there was no gunpowder stippling on

Parker's body, which indicated that the gun which killed Parker was fired from an

indeterminate range. Testimony from the coroner also reveals that Parker died from a six

and one-half inch graze-type gunshot wound to the head caused by a large caliber

weapon. Furthermore, the entrance wound was on the right side of Parker's scalp, which

indicates that the shooter would have been looking at the side of Parker's head at the time

6.

of the shooting. Photographic evidence reveals that glass from the minivan window was

found on Parker.

{¶ 15} On July 7, 2009, appellant was indicted on one count of felony murder in

violation of R.C. 2903.02(B) and 2929.02, an unclassified felony with an accompanying

firearm specification in violation of R.C. 2941.145, and one count of carrying a

concealed weapon in violation of R.C. 2923.12(A)(2) and (F), a fourth degree felony. At

his arraignment on July 24, 2009, appellant pleaded not guilty to all charges, and a jury

trialwas eventually held on March 22, 2010. On March 26, 2010, the jury reached a

guilty verdict on the felony murder charge and the attached firearms specification.

Appellant was acquitted on the carrying a concealed weapon charge. A presentence

investigation report was prepared and appellant was sentenced on April 22, 2010. This

appeal followed.

Assignments of Error

A. THE TRIAL COURT ERRED WITH ITS JURY

INSTRUCTIONS WHERE IT MANDATED THAT MR. BOOKER'S

CONVICTIONS FOR FELONY MURDER REGARDLESS OF THE

[SIC] ANY CONSIDERATION OF "SERIOUS PROVOCATION" IN ITS

DELIBERATIONS REGARDING THE UNDERLYING FELONIOUS

ASSAULT ALLEGATION.

B. THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN DENYING MR. BOOKER'S

MOTION FOR ACQUITTAL WHERE THE STATE FAILED TO

7.

PRESENT SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO SUSTAIN A CONVICTION

(TT4 AT 28-30; TT4 AT 139-40).

C. MR. BOOKER'S CONVICTION FOR FELONY MURDER

AND THE ATTENDANT FIREARM SPECIFICATION WAS AGAINST

THE MANIFEST WEIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE.

II. ANALYSIS

Jury Instructions

{¶ 16} Appellant raises two distinct issues in his first assignment of error. First,

appellant argues that an instruction on aggravated assault should have been given to the

jury. Second, appellant argues that the manner in which the trial court instructed the jury

on the felony murder charge precluded the jury's ability to consider the "lesser-included

offense" of voluntary manslaughter.

{¶ 17} Appellant first argues that the jury could have found him guilty of

aggravated assault, a fourth-degree felony, rather than felonious assault, a first-degree

felony, and therefore an instruction of aggravated assault was required. Appellant was

never charged with either felonious assault or aggravated assault. Nevertheless, appellant

contends that the instruction was required.

{¶ 18} Generally, we review the denial of a jury instruction under an abuse of

discretion standard. State v. Wolons, 44 Ohio St.3d 64, 68, 541 N.E.2d 443 (1989). An

abuse of discretion will be found where the trial court's attitude is unreasonable, arbitrary

or unconscionable. Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217, 219, 450 N.E.2d 1140

8.

. : • __ _ _ . _ . . _ _

(1983). However, because no objection was made to the trial court's omission of the

aggravated assault instruction, our review is limited to plain error. State v. Underwood,

3 Ohio St.3d 12, 13, 444 N.E.2d 1332 (1983); State v. Long, 53 Ohio St.2d 91, 372

N.E.2d 804 (1978). Plain error is an obvious error or defect in the trial court proceedings,

affecting substantial rights, where, "but for the error, the outcome of the trial clearly

would have been otherwise." Underwood at syllabus; Crim. R.52(B). The Supreme

Court of Ohio has admonished courts that notice of plain error under Crim.R. 52(B) is to

be taken "`with the utmost caution, under exceptional circumstances and only to prevent

a manifest miscarriage of justice."' Id., quoting Long at paragraph three of the syllabus.

11119) "The analysis whether a defendant is entitled to have the jury instructed on

an offense for which the defendant has not been indicted begins by first determining

whether the requested instruction falls within the statutory definition of a lesser included

offense or inferior degree offense." State v. Ledbetter, 2d Dist. No. 93-CA-54, 1994 WL

558996, *3 (Oct. 14; 1994). The Ohio Supreme Court has explained that, under Crim.R

31(C) and R.C. 2945.74, a jury may consider lesser, unindicted offenses only if the

evidence supports the lesser charge and the lesser charge falls into one of three groups.

State v. Deem, 40 Ohio St.3d 205, 208, 533 N.E.2d 294 (1988). A jury may consider

lesser, unindicted crimes that are (1) a lesser-included offense of the crime charged,

(2) an inferior degree of the crime charged, or (3) an attempt to commit the crime

charged, if such an attempt is an offense at law. Id.

9.

{¶ 201 Lesser-included offenses are said to be necessarily included within the

higher charge because the greater offense can never be committed without the lesser

offense being committed, as statutorily defined, and some element of the greater offense

is not required to prove commission of the lesser offense. Id. at 209. In contrast, "[A]n

offense is an `inferior degree' of the indicted offense where its elements are identical to

or contained within the indicted offense, except for one or more additional mitigating

elements which will generally be presented in the defendant's case." Id.

Aggravated Assault Instruction

{¶ 211 Based upon a plain error analysis, we conclude that the trial court

did not err by omitting the instruction for aggravated assault.

{¶ 221 R.C. 2903.11, defines the offense of felonious assault as follows,

(A) No person shall knowingly do either of the following:

(1) Cause serious physical harm to another ***;

{¶ 231 Aggravated assault, codified in R.C. 2903.12, provides:

(A) No person, while under the influence of sudden passion or in a

fit of rage, either ofwhich is brought on by serious provocation occasioned

by the victim that is reasonably sufficient to incite the person into using

deadly force shall knowingly:

(1) Cause serious physical harm to another ***. (Emphasis added.)

{¶ 241 The elements of felonious assault are identical to the elements of

aggravated assault, except that aggravated assault has an additional mitigating element.

10.

Deem, 40 Ohio St.3d at paragraphs two and four of the syllabus, 533 N.E.2d 294. Thus,

aggravated assault is an offense of an inferior degree to felonious assault. Id.; State v.

Elmore, 111 Ohio St.3d 515, 857 N.E.2d 547, 2006-Ohio-6207, ¶ 80.

111251 In a trial for felonious assault, where the defendant presents

sufficient evidence of serious provocation, such that a jury could both reasonably

acquit defendant of felonious assault and convict defendant of aggravated assault,

an instruction on aggravated assault, as an inferior degree of felonious assault,

must be given. Deem, 40 Ohio St.3d at 211, 533 N.E.2d 294. However, we

conclude that there was insufficient evidence that appellant acted under "sudden

passion or fit of rage" and appellant was not entitled to an instruction on

aggravated assault.

{¶ 26} "Provocation, to be serious, must be reasonably sufficient to bring on

extreme stress and the provocation must be reasonably sufficient to incite or to arouse the

defendant into using deadly force. In determining whether the provocation was

reasonably sufficient to incite the defendant into using deadly force, the court must

consider the emotional and mental state of the defendant and the conditions and

circumstances that surrounded him at the time." State v. Mabry, 5 Ohio App.3d 13, 449

N.E.2d 16 (8th Dist.1982), paragraph five of the syllabus.

{¶ 271 In State v. Shane, 63 Ohio St.3d 630, 635, 590 N.E.2d 272 (1992), the

Supreme Court elaborated on what constitutes "reasonably sufficient" provocation in the

context of voluntary manslaughter. First, an objective standard must be applied to

11.

determine whether the alleged provocation is reasonably sufficient to bring on a sudden

passion or fit of rage. That is, the provocation must be "sufficient to arouse the passions

of an ordinary person beyond the power of his or her control." Id. If this objective

standard is met, the inquiry shifts to a subjective standard, to determine whether the

defendant in the particular case "actually was under the influence of sudden passion or in

a sudden fit of rage." Id. at 634-635.

{¶ 28} As applied in this case, we find the evidence insufficient to establish that

appellant was subjectively under the influence of sudden passion or in a sudden fit of

rage to incite the use of deadly force. Appellant's testimony, corroborated for the most

part by Turner and Garrett, asserts that Turner "pistol whipped" and robbed appellant

prior to the shooting. Nevertheless, appellant admitted that he was not mad after being

hit by Turner. Appellant testified that he was afraid at the time, and that his fear was due,

in part, by his memory of the death of his sister during a robbery. Thus, the record

contains no evidence that appellant's actions were influenced by sudden passion or fit of

rage at the time he shot Parker and Turner. It is well established that fear alone is

insufficient to demonstrate the kind of emotional state necessary to constitute sudden

passion or fit of rage. See State v. Collins, 97 Ohio App.3d 438, 445-446, 646 N.E.2d

1142 (8th Dist.1994); State v. Cunningham, 2d Dist. No. 2759, 1991 WL 216410

(Oct. 17, 1991); State v. Williams, 8th Dist. No. 60819, 1992 WL 198114 (Aug. 13,

1992). Thus, even if the events leading up to the shootings could be viewed as

sufficiently provocative under an objective standard in the instant case, there is no

12.

evidence that appellant subjectively acted under the influence of sudden passion or fit of

rage brought on by serious provocation occasioned by the victim that was reasonably

sufficient to incite defendant into using deadly force. See Shane, 63 Ohio St.3d at 634,

590 N.E.2d 272.

{¶ 29} Accordingly, the trial court did not err by omitting an instruction on the

offense of aggravated assault as an inferior degree offense of felonious assault.

Voluntary Manslaughter Instruction

{¶ 30} Appellant next argues that he was entitled to an instruction on voluntary

manslaughter and that the trial court erred by instructing the jury not to consider the

offense of voluntary manslaughter, should it find appellant guilty of felony murder.

{¶ 31} In concluding its instruction on the felony murder charge, the trial court

stated,

If you find that the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt all of the

essential elements of murder, and that the Defendant failed to prove the

defense of self-defense, which will be later defined, by the preponderance

of the evidence, you must first find the Defendant guilty of the offense of

murder. You should then consider the firearm specification to [sic] murder

charge. You should not consider the lesser offense ofvoluntary

manslaughter if you find the Defendant guilty ofmurder." (Emphasis

added.)

13.

The trial court went on to state,

If you find that the State failed to prove any one of the essential

elements of the offense of murder, and if you find that the Defendant failed

to prove the defense of self-defense, you will continue your deliberations to

consider the lesser offense of voluntary manslaughter and a firearm

specification.

If all of you are unable to agree on a verdict of either guilty or not

guilty of murder then you will continue your deliberations to consider the

lesser offense of voluntary manslaughter and the firearm specification.

Thereafter, the trial court gave the jury an instruction for voluntary

manslaughter.

{¶ 32} Voluntary manslaughter, codified in R.C. 2903.03, provides:

(A) No person, while under the influence of sudden passion or in a

sudden fit of rage, either of which is brought on by serious provocation

occasioned by the victim that is reasonably sufficient to incite the person

into using deadly force, shall knowingly cause the death of another ***.

{¶ 33} The manner in which the trial court instructed the jury is similar to the

instructions given in State v. Osburn, 9 Ohio App.3d 343, 460 N.E.2d 314 (9th

Dist.l983). In Osburn, after defining the offense of murder, the trial court instructed the

jury as follows: "If you find that the State has proved beyond a reasonable doubt all the

essential elements of the lesser offense of murder, your verdict must be guilty of murder,

14.

and in that event you will not consider any further lesser offense. ***." Id. at 333. On

appeal, the court determined that the trial court was in error for charging the jury with

this instruction because it precluded the jury from considering the lesser offense of

voluntary manslaughter. The Osburn court specifically concluded,

In a prosecution for aggravated murder, a jury instruction directing

the jury to disregard the lesser offense of voluntary manslaughter until after

it decided defendant's lack of guilt on the lesser offense of murder was

erroneous, as it precluded the jury from considering the mitigating

circumstances of acting under extreme emotional stress while considering

the offenses of murder and aggravated murder. But under certain

circumstances, such error may be harmless. Id. at the syllabus.

{¶ 34} The Osburn court ultimately concluded that the record failed to disclose

any evidence of Osburn's extreme emotional stress and therefore the instruction was not

prejudicial.

{¶ 35} Given our previous conclusion that appellant was not subjectively acting

under sudden provocation of a fit of rage at the time he shot Parker, we conclude that

appellant was not entitled to any inferior degree instruction. Therefore, even if the trial

court erred in its instruction to the jury, any error is harmless. Therefore, appellant was

not prejudiced when the trial court advised the jury to not consider the mitigating element

contained in the voluntary manslaughter instruction should it find him guilty of felony

murder.

15.

{¶ 36} Accordingly, we find appellant's first assigned error not well-taken.

Sufficiency of the Evidence

11371 In his second assigned error, appellant argues that his conviction for felony

murder was not supported by sufficient evidence. We disagree.

{¶ 38} "In essence, sufficiency is a test of adequacy. Whether the evidence is

legally sufficient to sustain a verdict is a question of law." State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio

St.3d 380, 386, 678 N.E.2d 541 (1997). "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." State

v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259, 574 N.E.2d 492 (1991), paragraph two of the syllabus.

To support this assignment of error, appellant contends,

[T]he evidence did not support a finding of the element of Felony

Murder, that being that Mr. Booker was not acting under serious

provocation, thus reducing any assault to Aggravated Assault. Again,

Aggravated Assault, being a felony of the fourth degree, cannot support a

conviction for Felony Murder.

{¶ 391 This argument is unavailing given our analysis in appellant's first

assignment of error where we concluded that appellant failed to set forth evidence that he

was subjectively acting under sudden provocation or a fit of rage.

16.

{¶ 40} R.C. 2903.02(B) sets forth the elements of felony murder:

No person shall cause the death of another as a proximate result of

the offender's committing or attempting to commit an offense of violence

that is a felony of the first or second degree and that is not a violation of

section 2903.03 or 2903.04 of the Revised Code.

{¶ 41} "Offense of violence" is defined in R.C. 2901.01(A)(9) and includes

felonious assault in violation of R.C. 2903.11, a felony of the first or second degree.

Felonious assault, defined in R.C. 2903.11(A)(1), provides, "No person shall knowingly

* * * cause serious physical harm to another ***."

{¶ 42} Appellant admitted that he shot Parker with a firearm and that he saw

Parker "twist and duck" after he shot him. The coroner's testimony confirms that Parker

died as a result of a gunshot wound caused by a large caliber firearm. This testimony

shows that appellant knowingly shot Parker, causing serious physical harm to Parker,

which ultimately resulted in his death. From the record before us, we conclude that a

rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of felony murder beyond a

reasonable doubt.

{¶ 43} In regard to appellant's affirmative defense of self-defense, appellant

argues that "the trial court erred and the verdict was not supported by sufficient evidence

that [appellant] did not sufficiently prove self-defense by a preponderance of the

evidence." Thus, appellant disputes whether the jury should have rejected a felony

murder conviction when he presented evidence of presumptive self-defense, an

17.

..."............_ .... ....... ...... . .. .. . . ..

affirmative defense. Because this argument does not challenge the sufficiency of the

state's evidence to establish the elements of felony murder, we find it inappropriate in the

sufficiency-of-the evidence context. We do, however, find it cognizable under a manifest

weight of the evidence standard.

Weight of the Evidence

{¶ 44} In his third assignment of error, appellant argues that the felony murder and

firearm specification convictions were against the manifest weight of the evidence. We

disagree.

{¶ 45} When reviewing a manifest weight claim,

The court, reviewing the entire record, weighs the evidence and all

reasonable inferences, considers the credibility of witnesses and determines

whether in resolving conflicts in the evidence, the jury clearly lost its way

and created such a manifest miscarriage of justice that the conviction must

be reversed and a new trial ordered. The discretionary power to grant a

new trial should be exercised only in the exceptional case in which the

evidence weighs heavily against the conviction. State v. Lang, 129 Ohio

St.3d 512, 2011-Ohio-4215, 954 N.E.2d 596, ¶ 220, quoting Thompkins at

387.

{¶ 46} We do not find that this is the "exceptional case in which the evidence

weighs heavily against the conviction." Here, the evidence before the jury tends to prove

that appellant shot Parker causing serious physical harm which ultimately resulted in

18.

Parker's death. Furthermore, appellant admitted that he used a firearm when shooting

Parker. Appellant admitted that he threw a weapon that he described as a large gun out of

his van window once he turned onto Airport Highway, and a large caliber firearm was not

found at the scene. Furthermore, witnesses placed appellant's minivan at the scene at the

time of the shooting and Parker's blood and bodily tissue was discovered on appellant's

minivan. There was no evidence to the contrary. Rather, appellant attempted to show

that he acted in self-defense.

Self-defense

{¶ 47} Finally, as part of appellant's second assigned error, he argues that "the

trial court erred and the verdict is not supported by sufficient evidence that Mr. Booker

did not sufficiently prove self-defense by a preponderance of the evidence." We

disagree.

{¶ 48} Self-defense is an affirmative defense a defendant must prove by a

preponderance of the evidence. State v. Smith, 12th Dist. No. CA2010-05-047, 2011-

Ohio-1476, ¶ 33. To establish self-defense in a case where a defendant used deadly force,

"the defendant must prove: (1) he was not at fault in creating the situation giving rise to

the affray; (2) he had a bona fide belief he was in imminent danger of death or great

bodily harm and that his only means of escape from such danger was the use of deadly

force; and (3) he did not violate any duty to retreat or avoid the danger." State v.

Robbins, 58 Ohio St.2d 74, 388 N.E.2d 755 (1979), paragraph two of the syllabus. The

elements of self-defense are cumulative. Thus, "[i]f the defendant fails to prove any one

19.

of these elements by a preponderance of the evidence he has failed to demonstrate that he

acted in self-defense." State v. Jackson, 22 Ohio St.3d 281, 284, 490 N.E.2d 893 (1986).

See also State v. Williford, 49 Ohio St.3d,247, 249, 551 N.E.2d 1279 (1990); State v.

Caudill, 6th Dist. No. WD-07-009, 2007-Ohio-1557, ¶ 82; and State v. Clark, 6th Dist.

No. F-10-025, 2011 -Ohio-63 10, ¶ 22.

{¶ 49} It is well-settled that a jury is free to believe or disbelieve all, part, or none

of the testimony of any witness since the jury is in a much better position than a

reviewing court to view the witnesses, observe their demeanor, and assess their

credibility. State v. Nichols, 85 Ohio App.3d 65, 76, 619 N.E.2d 80 (4th Dist.1993).

Testimony emerged that could have convinced the jury that appellant shot and killed

Parker and shot and wounded Turner while both men were at the back of the vehicle.

Thus, the jury could have concluded that appellant was not in imminent danger and had

means to escape other than by use of deadly force-specifically by getting into his

vehicle and driving away. Further, the jury could have also concluded that Parker,

Garrett, and Turner all exited on the right side of the vehicle and started to flee. At that

point, appellant was not in imminent danger and had a duty to retreat and avoid any

further danger.

{¶ 501 We cannot say the jury clearly lost its way in rejecting appellant's self-

defense argument. The jury was required to assess the credibility of the witnesses and

determine which version of the events it believed. The testimony of Turner and Garrett,

along with the physical evidence, provides competent, credible evidence upon which the

20.

^ u .

jury could find appellant failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that he acted

in self-defense.

{¶ 51) Therefore, appellant's second and third assignments of error are not well-

taken.

III. CONCLUSION

{¶ 521 We find that substantial justice was done. Appellant's three assignments or

error are found not well-taken. The judgment of the Lucas County Court of Common

Pleas is affirmed. Pursuant to App.R. 24, appellant is ordered to pay the costs of this

appeal.

Judgment affirmed.

A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to App.R. 27. See

also 6th Dist.Loc.App.R. 4.

Peter M. Handwork, J.JUDGE

Arlene Singer, P.J.

Stephen A . Yarbrough J. JUDGECONCUR.

JUDGE

This decision is subject to further editing by the Supreme Court ofOhio's Reporter of Decisions. Parties interested in viewing the final reported

version are advised to visit the Ohio Supreme Court's web site at:http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/?s our c e=6 .

21.

recedved - sconet.state.oh.us r°ram !.--d -irv viql ... on p€erch 22, 2010, the matter was called...

Documents