Summary
The Ohio Second District Court of Appeals affirmed King Turner's convictions for aggravated burglary, felonious assault, aggravated murder, felony murder, having a weapon while under disability, and firearm specifications. The court rejected Turner's claims that the convictions were unsupported by sufficient evidence or against the manifest weight of the evidence, that his removal from the courtroom after clapping during closing argument violated his constitutional right to be present, and that consecutive sentences were improper.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the convictions were supported by sufficient evidence identifying Turner as a participant in the aggravated burglary, aggravated murders, firearm specifications, and weapons-under-disability offense.
- Whether the convictions were against the manifest weight of the evidence because the accomplice testimony was allegedly unreliable and the defense witnesses offered a more credible account.
- Whether the trial court violated Turner's constitutional right to be present at trial by removing him after repeated disruptive conduct, including clapping after the State's closing argument.
- Whether the trial court's findings supporting consecutive sentences under R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) were clearly and convincingly unsupported by the record.
Holdings
- The convictions were supported by sufficient evidence because a rational juror could find that Turner participated in the aggravated burglary, aggravated murders, firearm specifications, and weapons-under-disability offense beyond a reasonable doubt.
- The convictions were not against the manifest weight of the evidence because the jury reasonably credited the State's evidence and did not clearly lose its way or create a manifest miscarriage of justice.
- The trial court did not violate Turner's constitutional right to be present by removing him from the courtroom after repeated disruptive and disrespectful conduct and repeated warnings.
- The consecutive sentences were proper because the trial court made the required R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) findings and the record did not clearly and convincingly fail to support those findings.
Key quotations
“The flagrant disregard in the courtroom of elementary standards of proper conduct should not and cannot be tolerated.” (¶ 70)
“A trial court is required to make the findings mandated by R.C. 2929.14(C)(4) at the sentencing hearing and incorporate its findings into its sentencing entry, but it has no obligation to state reasons to support its findings.” (¶ 84)
Factual background
The State alleged that Turner and three accomplices broke into an occupied Dayton apartment to steal drugs, money, firearms, and other valuables, and that two residents were shot and killed. Trial evidence included accomplice testimony identifying Turner, surveillance footage, cell-phone-location evidence, DNA evidence, firearms evidence linking Turner's Glock to casings found at the scene, and evidence that Turner was injured and later concealed with an accomplice. Turner denied participating and offered an alternative account that he had been dropped off before the crimes and later accidentally shot while attempting to retrieve his firearm.
Procedural history
A jury found Turner guilty of multiple aggravated-burglary, aggravated-murder, felony-murder, felonious-assault, weapons-under-disability, and firearm-specification counts. The trial court merged several offenses and imposed an aggregate indefinite sentence of 77 to 82.5 years to life. Turner challenged the sufficiency and manifest weight of the evidence, his removal from the courtroom for disruptive conduct, and the imposition of consecutive sentences. The court of appeals overruled all four assignments of error and affirmed.